Poor, Edmund W wrote:
This is precisely the sort of misunderstanding
I was hoping would be averted, if we could
convey our neutrality policy properly.
Indeed.
Unfortunately, after a brief encounter with
the mailing list, a person who may have
considerable influence among readers has now
dismissed this project as having any standing
as a useful reference.
Well, I think she was really rude to go off like that based on her
disagreement with one person's remarks. As it turns out, I think that
she's right on the content issue, and that the medical terms are
neutral and should be used uniformly in the article.
What are everyone's thoughts on Eileen's
evaluation of our editorial policy on articles
relating to abortion?
Knee-jerk and not very helpful, that's what I think of her evaluation.
--Jimbo