TheresNoTime

Nice!

Great points! In an ideal world, editors would note exactly where in the referenced work they found the information — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Ident... has some guidance on how to do that :)

Maybe I need to add a section (in bold, flashing red text?) reiterating that you need to read the citations and not rely on the content?

This recent example is awful, yes, but relied heavily on a Wikipedia project which has less strict referencing rules, and was consumed by people who didn't take the time to fact-check — we're about on par with Encyclopedia Britannica (ref: https://www.nature.com/articles/438900a)

As always, excited to see what CF have been working on :)

Obligatory https://twitter.com/thechairguy06/status/1486601075717115905...

Nope?

The ratio of "but Web3 good lol" comments to those actually appreciating a well made site giving a playful jab at silly net fads is a bit low eh..

it's nicely made, no?