If one of the opinions is completely baseless, then that's not an easy decision, it's easy to make the "false" opinion so realistics that it seems more true than the real one. Bad idea. It's like saying that the CIA had Kennedy killed - conspiracy theories.
- Matt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cameron Childress" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 10:58 PM Subject: Re: Wikipedia sucks > Then it should be an easy decision for anyone reading the two opinions > and wants to decide for themselves. > > On 2/22/06, Michael Dinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Except that one opinion is based on a false premise that is not supported >> in >> history. >> >> >> > might be a solution. >> > >> >> in that case i would say that the scholoarly thing to do is to say >> >> that there are two opinions about the matter and cite the references >> >> for each one. then the individuals can decide for themselves... >> > >> > >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:197926 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
