The Sloan site is immediately more forward with its credentials and contact information, so presumably it will be more trustworthy overall. Additionally, the format and appearance of the site are more formal. It was actually founded by Alfred P. Sloan, the CEO of General Motors at the time. The Sloan foundation itself (found at http://www.sloan.org/) is philanthropic and not-for-profit, so I'm largely inclined to believe there is little to doubt about this site's integrity.

The intentions and motivations noted on the 'About Us' page seem productive as well. Both (intentions and motivations) seem to mirror details covered in class actually. Apparently in 2004 the goal changed from simply offering scholarships to actually promoting research through financial backing; a positive more broad approach in my opinion.

According to the partner site 'The Sloan Center on Aging & Work at Boston College' , "The Center focuses on flexible work options because they represent an innovative response to the aging workforce." This is interesting because it's the first direct mention to age. It does tend to sound here like they are more aggressively (or perhaps solely) supporting senior citizens or at least people 50+ in their working endeavors. I did neglect to mention thus far that both the Sloan Network and this partner association are at Boston College.

Overall I think it's a very informative and well meaning site. I think they back their claims up well and are what they claim to be. The philanthropic, not-for-profit aspects of the original organization are hard not to admire.

I stumbled on to this site after doing a google search for 'work and family'. Interesting site to say the least. It's entirely devoted to fighting legislation that could cut pensions for public employees. They actually have quite a vast membership and/or number of affected parties (mostly state unions and other organizations tied to state functions), but I could not figure out from the site exactly who started the movement, maintains it currently, etc.

I presume the credibility of this site is probably sketchy at best. Obviously they have an agenda to promote, and money is at the core of that agenda. When money is the only real motivator, it's hard to believe that honesty is held as the best policy.

I will say this about the site - it does seem to have one key point that, if true, would lend a huge amount of credibility to their cause. According to the PensionTruth statement, "For decades, Illinois politicians shorted or skipped the employer contributions required by law, creating the nation's largest pension debt." (weareoneillinois.org, 2011). If that is factual (they really provide nothing beyond a meager description) then it would lend some credibility to their case, and I personally would fully support their cause.

Ultimately, it's a pretty divisive issue. There are those that believe public pensions cost the state too much, although I personally believe that this is largely in due to political rhetoric to further their agenda of cutting the pensions they themselves may have very likely underfunded. I would like to see the site prove more of its case. On the other hand, many people value public employees the same as the military, as most of them are there to do the greater good and help the public, so undercutting them like this would be substantially distasteful. I noticed on the site log of events that it appeared legislation was passed to amend the details of the pensions, but I'm not entirely sure how (even after viewing a separate site here http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=512&GAID=11&DocTypeID=SB&SessionID=84&GA=97). Looks as though the actual debate is ongoing and has been postponed several times.