[Oblarg]

Originally Posted by Joe G.

I don't think it's so much about personal disagreement, as it is how people perceive the validity of the articles themselves. Knowledge of the experience, knowledge, and authority of the author is important when analyzing sources, to determine their validity and assess any biases that may be present. For example, I am highly inclined to respect and value the information in the MC-ing article because I know who Andy Grady is, and I know that his experiences mean he knows what he's talking about. I don't know who wrote the Ariel Assist retrospective, how their direct experiences with the game may have colored their view of the game (for better or for worse), and I have little reason to take a second look and go "huh, maybe this guy knows more about this than me" on sections of the article that I disagree with.

I think the site has potential as a platform for well thought-out views, even when they conflict or go against the norm. If the articles are anonymous, they inherently carry less power for generating positive change in the FIRST community.

Pretty much this.