They tend to be very objective

And represent both sides as honestly as possible

I'd say Ernest Adams but he's a cuck

The number of revisions required to start showing this effect, however, is quite large—at least 2,000 edits—and the articles most read by users aren't necessarily those most revised by editors. "To some extent, we are not seeing the scenario where too many cooks spoil the broth, we are mostly seeing an insufficient number of cooks," says Zhu.

If Wikipedia would like to improve its objectivity, Zhu recommends that it encourage editors to revise the most-read stories first, as well as encouraging people with different political leanings to edit the same article.

If you want, find anything that asks questions about trump

You will find people who will try to be objective

Maybe I should try it, huh

It'll look good on a resume!

And maybe ask for donations hehehe

Eh they will just someone who will do it for free

The benefit of Quora is that if theres a good answer, it will stay there.

What no

I mean donations from readers

Like wikipedia

Problem is, the people who are on those sites are people with nothing better do to

Make any change to any political article, and it will be reverted no matter how many sources you put on

Its most obvious on the MeToo and Gamergate wiki articles.

But this won't have metoo or stuff like thag

Itll be pure politics

Thats why I said Quora has that benefit

Certainly sounds interesting

Maybe even revolutions

You cant edit answers

You can

Other peoples answers

That's what I said man

@ExceptionalFeather Interesting. I've heard rumors though that Wikipedia created an editor hierarchy to control quality on the site (so we don't get long screeds on "arm cannons in Metroid")

I've then been told that the editors have been playing purge games with each other and then using their moderation powers to be picky and choosey with edits.

The readers can suggest edits

And if an admin wants, he can allow it

It'll be so cool

An admin can make edits to the answer of another person?

Considering what I've seen on Reddit and some documents I've read of influence campaigns, I'd believe the rumors.

More like block it as I understand.

@GingaBomber I was talking about my website

I was talking about quora sorry

The big issue with anything at politics is that there's a natural desire to corrupt it.

You can suggest edits

Or for it to become an echo chamber.

And the writer of the answer can approve it

If you can solve those problems, you could probably solve much bigger problems than a website TBH.

I say I regularly recycle the writers