I guess this is not a new issue from your comment. My concern was that having just posted a piece that fits very well in the economics category but is really just my opinion based on my observations and not a factual article, that having the option to include it in an opinion category would clarify this.
Thing is, if I set that bar and create the category, will anyone else do the same or will there be a little devtome category all for little old me?
I do think if people were willing to categorise their work this way it might lead to some overall clarity in the future.
Also, can I volunteer to help with categorising/filing so you mob are not so over worked? (Or is this the paid job I read about on Devtome?)
Oh...and I promise when it's tongue in cheek it wont be vague
This in general is an area for everybody to decide on, not me.
My opinion is that every non-fiction article should be sourced and referenced, otherwise it's not necessarily even non-fiction. As to then breaking that down to fact vs opinion, the problem is 1) Devtome is not wikipedia, and I don't think the world needs another wikipedia; 2) This would require a very high bar of proof and then comprehensive checks.
Therefore devtome is pretty much all opinion, because system methodology isn't yet able to prove otherwise, which makes having specific 'opinion' sections a bit pointless. Opinion is fine, but it still needs referencing. An opinionated rant or a incorrect spiel on 'science' though is not an article, again in my opinion. Basically claims should be justified.
Your article - if you're not sure about the justification via economic rationale but feel it correctly relates to Oz, you cuold put it in the australia, anthropology etc category instead - wherever you think it's most appropriate?
Volunteer - I think admin works on the basis of invites in the context of constructive input. You seem to show that, but it's not up to me.