Toying with blogging
What I've thought about doing here is some debunking. Taking an internet posting about Oracle that someone (or me for that matter) feels is just plain wrong. Taking a look at it. Trying to understand what the author might have been trying to say and whether I agree with the content or not. In the same vein as Database Debunkings does. I'll try not to be as blunt as they and their readers are sometimes, (but I do rather like the readers use of the dictionary in this letter to the editor, I'm fond of that tool as well) but it will be "to the point".
I'd like to hear feedback on what you think about such a concept.
If I go forward with it, I would accept URL's that point to material readers feel is questionable. I would ask that you would email the URL to me along with a brief description of why you feel it is questionable material (dangerous questionable material would be most prefered, material that in the hands of a neophyte would be downright bad). Then, at the rate of once or twice a week, take a look at one or two of them.
I would attempt to contact the author of any such material beforehand with my inputs, I've done that in the past on asktom prior to posting material, in a good faith attempt to correct the material. But if the information is unattributed or I cannot reach the author, that would not necessary stop the presses.
All comments, anonymous or otherwise, fully appreciated.