On Friday 05 May 2006 17:35, Farhan Ahmed wrote: > Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote: > > On Friday 05 May 2006 15:19, Farhan Ahmed wrote: > > (snip) > > > > > PS: Your quote in previous message about gentoo-wiki is not true.. > > > Although I agree that the Flags I quoted were unstable, you cannot say > > > gentoo-wiki cannot be trusted just because it can be edited by anyone.. > > > If you are true then you cannot trust any Free Software because it too > > > can be edited.. Agreed that someone might post wrong info, but it's > > > even more likely that someone will recognize it and correct it.. This > > > is the beauty of open source.. > > > > it is much easier to vandalize a wiki then software. > > > > I, you, anyone can get one or two sentences into any wiki article, that > > look sane, but are totally wrong. And nobody but an expert would find it. > > > > gentoowiki is nice, but you always have to turn your brain on, before > > doing, what is written there. > > The same is true for wikipedia - don't think, that everything written > > there is true. Blatant vandalization is easy to spot. But subtile > > misinformation, that is the problem. And it is a big one. > > But it'll be corrected nonetheless.. :)
do you really think? There are cases, where misonformation was not found for month, even longer - and there are a lot of very demanding and obscure articles, would you really bet, that every case of voluntary misinformation can and will be found? I won't. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
