The following idea is based on a suggestion someone just came out with. A
number of users were discussing BLPs and the point that verification of
written sources and journals was not that easy in many cases.
Many colleges or libraries use a subscription and their members or even
members of the public can then read those references. I'm not an expert, but
the following idea came to mind as worthwhile asking for thoughts on, if it
has any merit.
Suppose the Foundation subscribed to various key databases. A proxy (however
one does it), gets set up that people can log in to, and then read those
journals or databases. The Foundation sets a fee scale for access, in
whatever way works, and any person who wants to subscribe, can do so. In
some cases, subscription might be free. Anonymity, including anonymity of
any payment, is easy (see below)
* General and society benefits -- spread of knowledge; user and third party
enjoyment at having access to information they might otherwise not have;
less widely used subscription-only databases may be made more accessible
* Wikipedia quality benefits -- users can purchase easy access to reliable
sources that otherwise they may not conveniently have; users can verify
citations and references that they might otherwise not be able to; articles
will more regularly become exposed to updated research (if the idea takes
off).
* Other project benefits and possible features -- Financial (steady income
stream from subscriptions); small trial ability; great scaleability if
successful; inherently fairly safe in an income/expenditure sense.
Payment can readily be made anonymous (the means to pay via anything from
credit card to paypal to "internet gold" already exists) so that
pseudonymous users can participate equally, a login account is issued with
payment so no identification to WMF is needed, and given a login the login
can be used from home, school, mobile, or work.
One novel example of pricing differentiality might include, a lower rate (or
free) for users who routinely add cited high quality content to the project,
or who use/have used the sources directly to benefit articles. Perhaps a
cheaper rate for users with at least one FA or two GAs, or a subjective
decision for the year, for users who can show good cause in their
contributions. Some ideas, but the principle is interesting.
If there are practical issues, so be it, but I don't see an obvious problem,
and it might be worth passing round for thoughts.
FT2