Talk:Cognitive liberty/Archive 1

Archive 1

unsupported claims

"The two most important...are the ACLU and CCLE " Perhaps the ACLU is common knowledge, but there is no evidence that that espouse this particular definition. To claim the other require demonstration of importance, which I do not think possible.DGG 20:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

What would you propose as proof in this case? Links to their first hand positions on the topic? Hominidx 15:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

The CCLE is very well known, at least among certain demographics. It is affiliated with Dr. Alexander Shulgin and has existed for quite some time. It is a shame that it doesn't have an article of its own. The ACLU on the other hand, might be debatable as to whether or not it attempts to protect cognitive liberties, but the CCLE? The name makes it quite obvious that that is what they do. And they're perfectly notable, as I've said before. Fuzzform 23:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

It does seem then that links would help those who dont know much about it, such as myself. :)DGG 07:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Where is the Debate?

I don’t understand how the neutrality of this article could be considered in dispute. If there is an opposing view on the meaning of cognitive liberty and what it entails then that view should be offered for examination. If there is no opposing position then the article’s neutrality is confirmed based on the factual nature intrinsic of a single proposed definition. This article can only be disputed if someone comes forward not only to say it is inaccurate but explain why. I don’t thing the absence of a reference qualifies as an example of inaccuracy.

Perhaps the confusion occurs because this is a relatively new concept, at least new to the foreground of conversation. Someone has to start somewhere when terminology is introduced to facilitate discussion of concepts. Maybe the neutrality is in dispute because it is insinuated that that certain people enjoy cognitive liberty while others are stripped of this right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.106.140.91 (talk) 16:56, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 03:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)