<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Citizens' Encyclopædia</title>
	<link>http://www.citizendia.org</link>
	<description>Thoughts on the idea of bringing knowledge for the masses</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:49:10 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>Comment on Citizendium, the prudish encyclopedia by Mike Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.citizendia.org/wikipedia/citizendium-the-prudish-encyclopedia/#comment-6</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2007 19:48:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.citizendia.org/wikipedia/citizendium-the-prudish-encyclopedia/#comment-6</guid>
					<description>I think it's early to predict how our policy will turn out-- we're still working out how it'll work. Feel free to sign up and give your input.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it&#8217;s early to predict how our policy will turn out&#8211; we&#8217;re still working out how it&#8217;ll work. Feel free to sign up and give your input.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Citizendium, the prudish encyclopedia by admin</title>
		<link>http://www.citizendia.org/wikipedia/citizendium-the-prudish-encyclopedia/#comment-5</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:28:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.citizendia.org/wikipedia/citizendium-the-prudish-encyclopedia/#comment-5</guid>
					<description>The issue of porn stars is that if Wikipedia would follow its own policies, it would have to delete a lot of them. I'm not blaming Citizendium for this. 

But the current  page on differences from Wikipedia also mentions the fetishes: I think there's quite a large body of literature regarding them and they can't be considered &quot;not important&quot; or &quot;non-encyclopedic&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The issue of porn stars is that if Wikipedia would follow its own policies, it would have to delete a lot of them. I&#8217;m not blaming Citizendium for this. </p>
<p>But the current  page on differences from Wikipedia also mentions the fetishes: I think there&#8217;s quite a large body of literature regarding them and they can&#8217;t be considered &#8220;not important&#8221; or &#8220;non-encyclopedic&#8221;.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Citizendium, the prudish encyclopedia by Mike Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.citizendia.org/wikipedia/citizendium-the-prudish-encyclopedia/#comment-4</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2007 16:37:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.citizendia.org/wikipedia/citizendium-the-prudish-encyclopedia/#comment-4</guid>
					<description>Hi,

I think you may be misconstruing Citizendium. We do not aim to scour all traces of sexuality from the encyclopedia; we do plan on building the best encyclopedia for all ages possible. In our current plan, that involves including articles on sexuality, but doing so in a non-graphic fashion. If a piece of information is important- as many aspects of sexuality are- there will be a place for it in Citizendium. But this does not necessarily mean we'll have bios of porn stars.

Mike Johnson
Citizendium Executive Committee</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I think you may be misconstruing Citizendium. We do not aim to scour all traces of sexuality from the encyclopedia; we do plan on building the best encyclopedia for all ages possible. In our current plan, that involves including articles on sexuality, but doing so in a non-graphic fashion. If a piece of information is important- as many aspects of sexuality are- there will be a place for it in Citizendium. But this does not necessarily mean we&#8217;ll have bios of porn stars.</p>
<p>Mike Johnson<br />
Citizendium Executive Committee
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
