Two more replies...
Charles Matthews wrote:
Seems to me you are letting off a fair amount of steam here. That is a traditional role of mailing lists, and in particular of wikien. Your unsubtle flaming of Jimmy here isn't likely to change too many minds; which is more than can be said for some of your past and more insidious comments on Wikipedia, in more prominent places. So go ahead, if it lances the boil.
Charles, I wrote an open letter, which has appeared on Jimmy Wales' user talk page as well as my blog, and now several other places--including this list. I'm not merely "flaming" Jimmy Wales on this list. I am publicly calling him to account. I am actually trying to achieve a certain effect, as I've explained.
I wrote:
Deny it if you must, but you have a problem on your hands.
Fred Bauder replied:
A problem you are trying to stir up.
A problem I am exacerbating--quite right. Do you have a problem with that?
As far as "Wikipedia [being] an endless source of scandal and dishonesty", that is an artifact of your own wishful thinking.
Well, if that's really what you want to think, Fred, I'm not going to spend my time trying to convince you otherwise. Suffice it to say that, outside of Wikipedia's inner circles and its Web 2.0 promoters and fans, Wikipedia's reputation for honesty and decency is rather less than sterling.
As the promoter of a competing project your interest is transparent.
Your insinuation here, Fred, deserves no reply.
I do think an apology is due you from Jimmy Wales, but that ought to be the end of it.
If Jimmy Wales were to apologize, he would have to admit that he had done something wrong., and for me to believe an apology, I should have to see him correct the record and say he was wrong. What are the chances of that happening? I think I know Jimmy well enough to know he will never do that.
--Larry