On 20/06/2016 1:12 AM, Stewart Baldwin via wrote: > > I agree that many novices quickly advance to the stage where they can > recognize the difference between good and dreadful sources, but I have > also encountered too many who still can't tell the difference after > years of "experience." Also, there are too many bad genealogists who > are pretty good at putting enough "window dressing" on their work to > make it look better documented than it is. Many novices have difficulty > distinguishing such work from good research. > This is unfortunately true, and I'm afraid there is often no remedy in more experience. As we can plainly see from current events in the USA, a certain proportion of humankind exults in wilful ignorance. Their idea of logic is "I don't know it, therefore it isn't known" and/or "I don't like you and believe the opposite, therefore I am right and you must do as I wish". Contrariness and infantile self-centredness are fundamental character flaws that can't be educated out of some people, including some genealogists (as well as an appalling lot of voters). A settlement by consensus is only worthwhile insofar as the group assent is informed, reasoned and free of self-interest. Wiki seems to me no more likely a means to achieve this than an open primary or a caucus where many of the attendees are wishful enthusiasts. Peter Stewart