Samantha Johnson wrote:
<snip>
So who are these people vetting user entries on the Notable Names Database?
How do we know this is an authoritative source? I can't find much
information about this group to tell one way or the other. Has anyone else
had more luck with this?
</snip>
These are good questions but it also shows some of the directions of the future which may prove to be alarming to many. As I wrote before, I don't understand the purpose of the site and I know nothing about them. But if we make our data "open" it will mean that *anyone* can use it *any way* they want. Certainly you can make stipulations and make people register and cut them off if you don't agree with what they are doing, but then it's not "open."
But I think this fits in perfectly well with our ethics, anyway. We still buy copies of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion even though we know it's a complete fabrication and has been used to hurt many people. We make available materials from the Heritage Foundation or Dissent, whether we agree with the ideas or not. Going on to open data is a bit frightening because we don't know where it might end up, but it seems to be a logical continuation of the library mission. The way I look at it is that using library data that conforms to library standards and library ethics should only be a positive.
Jim Weinheimer
Received on Tue Feb 23 2010 - 10:56:48 EST