On 1/22/07, Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/23/07, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/20/07, Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Having been requested by Jimmy to do so, and having seen a fun rumor of a "search engine optimization world championship" contest targeting WP[1], I've gone ahead and switched rel="nofollow" back onto URLs in en.wikipedia.org's article namespace.
Does Jimmy have that authority? Should this have gone through the board? Did it?
You know very well that the board lets Jimbo run wikipedia. If they have a problem with his actions, they can do something about it, but lets face it: for the first half-decade that Jimbo's been in control, he's done a pretty darn good job.
This is just wikilawyering.
That's not what wikilawyering is. I wasn't questioning whether Jimbo was doing a good or bad job, and I seriously doubt he needs people to leap to his defense and resort to namecalling to attack questioners.
I asked three specific questions, which so far as I know Anthony and Oskar can't directly answer except through (reasonable) surmisal.
Is it explicit policy that Jimbo continues to have a free hand to make policy decisions for Wikipedia by fiat? I think that would be perfectly fine, but I'm still trying to grasp what Jimbo's role is becoming as the Foundation becomes more established and formal.