Loading...
 

point of view

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 where it is "absolute and non-negotiable" despite being subject to a great deal of sway based on who is involved. Wikipedia in particular is very often accused of clique, cabal, favouring personal friends of administrators, and other insider abuses of power.

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 where a new (even annoying) participant has higher status than trusted insiders. This they claim is the only way to counter groupthink. This is not a popular view but should be noted for completeness, and as a critique of the insider-driven methods. It bears some resemblance to theories of continuous revolution and appears to reflect an anarchist conception of the dangers of over trust in a group entity. The main value of this view so far is producing the ideal of the Lowest Troll, which seems like a very practical solution to the general problem of status and authority in an online anonymized discourse.