Re: [Bug-gne]the problem of illegal content vs. freedom

[Tom Chance]

> > People are free to vote and you should believe in
> democracy -- I
> > mean real democracy, direct democracy.
> 
> There is a difference between democracy and simple
> 50%+1 voting.

There is indeed. When the notion of democracy
originally came about in Athens, the idea was more
that in every single issue everybody would have a say,
and then that issue would go down to a vote where at
least 2/3rds of the people had to vote "yes" for an
idea to pass. Since then its been twisted into a
different idea of "democracy" for every country. None
have really got it right.


> > If somebody else wants to write his view on
> foreign politics in the
> > US and he is knowledgeable, he'll get a "yes".
> 
> From half? The goal of Tom's voting system, I think,
> is just to get
> rid of stuff which is unanimously thought to be
> junk; it shouldn't be
> meant as a way to get rid of ``unpopular'' opinion
> pieces, etcetera:
> that is a job for the classifiers.

Pretty much, yes. Lose the adverts, binary bombs and
articles about Ted's mum being a whore, and accept
everything else. Then let the various classification
systems people come up with filter anything out, and
ensure ALL articles are available on the main GNE
system.


> > Articles on revisionism are more a problem. 
> Revisionists have
> > developped techniques to reference books and
> articles from their
> > closed world.  Analysing their writings, they
> always write the same
> > and reference the same books.  You could challenge
> them, but it
> > would take a serious historian a lot of time, just
> because their
> > internal litterature is hard to find and accurate
> sources are hard
> > to consult.  On this issue, you need to rely on a
> voting system and
> > hope for a rejection.
> 
> I disagree. You need to accept that article and let
> classifiers deal
> with it. Hopefully, you'd get another article which
> soundly refutes
> the wrong information...

Personally if I saw an article I really disagreed
with, I'd write one citing my own opinions. But then
I'm quite active in that way. But I'm sure if somebody
posted an article that WAS incorrect (like saying that
F=2ma for instance) it would be quickly superceded by
a correct article (stating that F=ma). And I have no
doubt somebody will make a scientific classification,
which could end up (like RMS suggested) as the GNE
Science resource, which would filter our articles with
scientifically incorrect material. Also if somebody
comes along later and proves one article wrong with
some research, it would be good to keep the original
theory there. Maybe GNE will stop facades like "who
invented calculus?"!

Tom Chance

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/