The Virtual Bookcase Reviews of 'Best of the Net':
Reviewer Rob Slade wrote:
Gee, it's rather gratifying to find your name in the acknowledgements section,
even if you had nothing to do with the book, can't find any contribution you
made, and can't, in fact, find your name mentioned thereafter. (Judging by my
friends in the list, I think our names were copied from the VIRUS-L FAQ.)
The book is supposedly made up of recommendations from "a group of Internet
experts" and "numbers of motivated, involved, smart people". But, as they say
in the academic papers, the study was flawed. Godin sent out a request for
people to send him stuff, so the study sample "self selected" for people who
had nothing better to do. Quick reality check. Do we have RISKS? No. Oak?
No. Net-happenings? No. alt.best.of.internet or usenet? No. RTFM? Yes
(once). The Vatican exhibit? No. rec.humor.funny? No (well, maybe fair
comment). News of the Weird? Yes. This Is True? No.
What we do have, here, are two hundred "topics", all two pages long. Each has
a few (very few) net references, mostly newsgroups. (A lot of the other
"references" are "veronica".) Some references are long out of date (and the
computer virus citations are awful). There are random pieces of information--
extracts from newsgroup postings or FAQ listings, and often a picture from
somewhere. These have no proper citations at all.
copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995
Add my review for Best of the Net