On 8/11/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Whats so hard about "we welcome text which is
good, no matter who or
how it was created and we reject or repair text which is bad."?
I thought that *was* our credo - presuming "good" rules out copyright
infringement. I would like to hear more of an explanation behind this
rejection of apparent "conflict of interest". There's got to be more
to this than that. I agree with Jimbo on almost everything he does, so
I'm hoping I will end up understanding where he's coming from in
acting so swiftly and so strongly in blocking (at first) an editor
apparently contributing useful text.
For or against paid editing? Paid editing is an
orthogonal issue. I
wish all of our contributors could be better compensated for their
fantastic contributions.
Yeah!
If we can't cope with bias coming from
known-interested sources then
we have no hope... most biased sources do not announce their
intentions.
Exactly. One of the reasons I found it bizarre to block the US
Congress. Much better just to watch it. Then you give people two
options: edit openly and responsibly from their real IP address, or
find a different IP address and do whatever the hell they want.
Steve