🚀 go-pugleaf

At 04:56 PM 10/20/98 -0500, Brandee Crisp wrote:
>My library just started offering classes to the public on basic Internet
>use. I wrote the majority of our "script" because the other teachers are
>less comfortable with computers in general. I have tried to tell them[staff
>and patrons] to look at domain names so they can recognize commercial,
>government sites and others, not because one is good or bad but so they
>become familiar with what types of information are available. I have also
>told them that sites with tildes[~] in them are often personal pages, and
>they might want to look through the site for more information as to who is
>responsible for the information.  This doesn't make a personal site "bad".
>It just reflects that there is no editor-in-chief or fact-checker for the
>Internet.  I look forward to reading what others think.

Brandee:

It's hard to rely on a domain name as a guide to quality Internet
information.  Some excellent resources are available on "home grown" sites;
by the same token, a site with a dedicated domain name can have inaccurate
or even fraudulent information.  Careful review of the content (author's
qualifications, conflicts of interest, references, etc.) is the only way
one can fairly validate information.

I just completed developing an advanced Internet course that includes a
module on information validation; let me know if I can be of any further
assistance.  In the health care industry, validating Internet content is a
major issue; an excellent resource on this topic is available at
http://www.mitretek.org/hiti/showcase/documents/criteria.html


Brian Pomeroy
lunar@voicenet.com
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/6346/bio.htm
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia - http://www.chop.edu/