Launching Sanger Consulting

I’m announcing an Internet consulting business. Learn more at a new website:

> <

I’ve consulted briefly with many companies over the years. Nobody seems disappointed.

The thing that I can do possibly better than anyone is to give a complete analytical review of your site(s) and app(s), identifying issues and areas of improvement, put in my recommended priority order to fix. I am very fast at producing pages and pages of such feedback—high density, high impact.

I am also quite interested in conceiving and architecting new websites from the ground up, something I have a lot of experience doing.

There are many different types of projects I could get interested in. Generally speaking, I accept jobs that I think will potentially have an important benefit to humanity. Life is too short for anything else.






Please do dive in (politely). I want your reactions!

5 responses to “Launching Sanger Consulting”

  1. Dear Larry,

    I was pleased to see your involvement with Everpedia and their move to create monetary value for contributors.

    I think much more can be done to provide a truly next generation platform for the creation and sharing of knowledge.

    In short, we need a Wikipedia-like central platform for not only “encyclopedic” articles representing consensus views but also for ACTIVE DEBATE.

    I’ve mocked up a website for “Search for Truth” to “to provide a site to discover, document, index, summarize all human knowledge–and even to create new knowledge.”

    The goal of SearchForTruth is to provide new tools and policies that help to refine, test, or at least improve the presentation of every fact, view, opinion or thesis the may be a subject of interest or debate.

    In contrast to Wikipedia’s search for “consensus truths” which drive away contributors who challenge consensus views, Search for Truth believes that controversies should be explored, not suppressed.

    For many, perhaps most topics, different viewpoints are a most critical part of the human knowledge. Therefore, we are committed to providing a platform for all viewpoints to present the different facts, rationales and belief systems that they hold to be true in as convincing of a fashion as each faction can muster.

    The only caveat is that we want to also provide a way for competing viewpoints to interact in a healthy, constructive way, allowing readers to find, discover, explore, and even vote on the viewpoints with which they most agree or disagree.

    We believe that by providing a healthy, structured way to not only record but to debate and then refine these different viewpoints, we can help to directly advance human knowledge.

    These goals are achieved by having different types of pages which are governed by different rules for editing and commenting on material. There are five general types of pages:

    Collaborative thesis: jointly developed by like-minded authors; commented on by others

    Personal thesis: developed by one or few authors, commented on by many

    Encyclopedic pages: definitions and non-controversial comprehensive summaries which point to thesis pages related to any associated controversy

    Lists and Categories: collaborative or individual lists of links to articles or other lists to organize the discovery of content.

    Mind Map Pages: mind maps created by individuals showing the linkage between propositions defining a set of beliefs

    Administrative: policy and help pages

    Statistics and Voting: these non-editable system generated pages, and will include statistics on theses receiving the highest, and lowest levels, of support from readers

    I would like to get your feedback.

    Dave Reardon

  2. You can view the mockup site at — which also shows how critics of articles can insert limited critiques with links to counter viewpoints.

  3. Robert Dunn

    Sorely needed…

    1. Hi Robert, then please get in touch via!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *