Three thoughts come to mind:
(1) My pastor during my childhood liked to repeat the old maxim: “Having an open mind can be a good thing—but not so open that your brains spill out and prove worthless.”
(2) Would I rather learn calculus from an “open minded” textbook or one that has been carefully edited and proofread?
(3) Is a university Department of Astronomy which has a fully endowed Chair of Astrology & the Astrological Arts superior by virtual of its “open-mindedness.” Likewise, a Discovery Institute which includes a wide-spectrum of “ID advocates” must surely face questions of exactly where to draw the line.
Whatever leeway they may grant their “associate scholars” or whatever the term, isn’t EvolutionNews supposed to be an official avenue for the communication of Discovery Institute positions and objectives to the general public? Does not the honesty and integrity of EvolutionNews thereby inevitably reflect upon the ethics and mission statement of the Discovery Institute? (Frankly, I think EvolutionNews has a long history of portraying the Discovery Institute as far more loony that it actually is. Of course, seeing how EvolutionNews actually is speaking for the DI, mine is probably an irrelevant and illogical observation.)
FOR CERTAIN:
I am hoping that @dcscccc and @deliberateresult can shed light on why the Discovery Institute has not corrected the obviously erroneous statements about the Theory of Evolution and Common Descent not predicting the similarity between the human and chimpanzee genomes.