What makes it so good?

Undoubtedly there's a great deal of subjectivity involved here. Sometimes it's the writing itself, though most often it's a down to earth approach to the subject, and a lack of a grocery list of pointers such as "if it's '.edu' it's trustworthy". I find it fascinating that I still encounter that argument, even though it has close to no basis in fact. Principles for Evaluating Websites, by Stephen Downes, is one of my favorites simply because it deals less with the internet than it does with important questions like how we judge point of view or bias - questions that are at the core of attempting to evaluate any source of information.

Go to: Just who do you think you are?