Re: [Bug-gnupedia] Design proposal

[Imran Ghory]

On 22 Jan 2001, at 15:19, Tom Chance wrote:
> It comes back to the old "edison
> didn't invent the light bulb" article or the "tianemen
> square was a counter-revolutionary triumph" article.
> If it came down the the vote, some may think "that's
> factually innacurate" and vote no, some might just
> think "what a horrible article" and vote to reject it,
> even if thats not a valid reason (there's no way of
> guaranteeing their reason is valid!). As such I would
> have thought a positive voting mechanism would be
> better (you can only vote "yes" for an article, one or
> two yes votes gets it in, moderators are people who
> have cotributed a lot to the project so they won't
> want ot sabotage it). 

I'm not suggesting that people be allow to vote to block if they 
disagree with it only if it is illegal/spam/nonsensical. 

They should be allowed to vote if they think an article is on 
factually debatable ground, but this shouldn't cause a rejection. 
This should provide data which can be associated by the article so 
people know when reading it that the review body thought that the 
topics in the article are on debated factual grounds.

> As the "Nupedia Integration", I think Nupedia is still
> too strong a word to use. I think that if you went to
> visit the project, you could enter EITHER Nupedia OR
> Gnupedia (or whatever it gets called). We can share
> alllll the articles we want, and keep in close
> contact, but I think it would be beneficial to keep
> the two projects slightly seperate, simply from the
> point of view of technological and policy approaches.

Under my proposed model this is close to what would happen, but 
with Nupedia being a filtering body and an index of the GNUpedia. 
This would mean that Nupedia could take whatever policy 
decisions they wish independantly of Gnupedia while still providing 
an important part of the GNU Encyclopedia.

Imran Ghory