22-09-2013, 03:58 AM
Peter Lemkin Wrote:I think we would have it so only DPF members could contribute to it. If any one wanted to contribute to it they would have to join. But viewable to all. Lone nutter have plenty of places they can spout their crap.Tracy Riddle Wrote:I agree, Peter, it would be HUGE. That's probably why no one has wanted to tackle it. Everything would have to be footnoted and sourced. There would be a lot of conflicting information in each article, but as long as the reader could see the sources for each claim, that would be OK. Wikipedia tolerates a certain amount of that.
IMO, however, one would still need some 'moderators' to make sure it all stayed away from the official version and Mockingbirds, provocateurs, disinfo agents, etc. Yes, one could have a few articles with differing opinions on where shots came from, who was in the Plaza photos, whether Badgeman was real or shadows, etc. Once, when I was rich [hard to believe, as I'm not so poor I'm at risk shortly of loosing a roof over my head], I planned on funding such an encyclopedia in print, as such didn't yet exist on the internet and I was one of the few using the internet - mostly for communication - there wasn't much on it.
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.