In a values format, the pillars could be reflected in the following way:
Appropedia values information that is:
- Useful - describes something relevant to however we define the boundary of our operating space (like, do we cover medicine? do we cover nanotechnology? how's about space-based power stations? - it's all "sustainability")
- Honest - describes both sides of issues, rather than selectively shoving some data under the rug (for example, if people from biodiesel companies come to write it up, they'll have excellent data - but may be tempted to omit some issues, like food competition.)
- Accurate and verifiable - including numerical data about impact, and lists data sources, even if these come from experiential knowledge.
- Contextualized - measured against metrics such as "number of deaths from poverty annually" or "average environmental impact of one American"
In order to achieve this information we maintain a code of conduct, and request that users exhibit:
- Strong bias toward requiring verification / validation / quantification of information
- Open-mindedness toward different perspectives, new approaches
- Recognition that we can have common interests / mission and still disagree
- Readiness to forgive / ask for forgiveness when things get heated.
And, hopefully as a community with the data in front of us we can identify and share:
- What we know
- What we don't know - imponderables, "that's just too hard" research goals
- Key next steps - What's we don't know that it would be really good to know