|
The point of view from which one writes is the most basic choice in writing style?.
The most extensive definition of the issues involved in point of view is used at Disinfopedia?: http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Point_of_view A sympathetic point of view is generally free of criticisms of its subject. The SPOV is defined best at Wikinfo: http://wikinfo.org/wiki.php?title=Point_of_view Material prepared by researchers for mass media? or legislator or Issue Advocate use must tend more towards neutral point of view, that is, common biases, prejudices, challenges, common sense, misconceptions, errors and stupidity must be dealt with explicitly, and the entire article, e.g. a backgrounder? must be an example of "writing for the enemy?". This is particularly important in preparing for debate. The NPOV is defined best at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view In part as a response to these abuses: Some politically-minded wiki users advocate a multiple point of view like that of representative democacy? itself. In large public wikis, this would allow for factions to form and have explicit and recognized identity - for instance in a policy salon. Some radical trolls advocate a much more participatory democracy based on what they call a New Troll point of view |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||