[Taxacom] iSpecies with Wikipedia

[Richard Pyle]

> (given 
> Rich's definition of expert I suppose because they are on the 
> web and expressing an opinion they are also "expert") 

This is certainly not my definition of "expert"!!

I see also that my use of the word "algorithm" in this thread has been
widely misinterpreted.

Unfortunately, I don't have time to explain in greater detail than I already
have; so I will come back to the original point I was trying to make:

- Acknowledging and embracing the diversity of taxonomic assertions is
something that I believe should be important to practicing taxonomists.

- The vast majority of consumers of biological information (who are not
taxonomists) lack both the interest and the expertise to form their own
judgements concerning alternative taxonomic viewpoints, and would prefer a
single classification that effectively balances the desire for it to be
"current" with the desire for it to be relatively stable.

My original point: These two things do not need to be mutually exclusive.

My secondary point: organizing information electronically in a clever way,
incorporating the sorts of features that Doug and others articulated, can
assist us in accomodating both of the above items.

And no smoke-filled rooms or authoritarian walls are needed.

Back to work....

Aloha,
Rich