"Jake Nelson" wrote
No matter what, people will be paid to edit. The questions is whetehr they'll bother to tell us.... let's make a registration requirement, and ban the hell out of anyone who violates it, and see where that takes us.
Disagree. That isn't a strategy. What would be a strategy? Certainly (a) encourage corporations and others to post GFDL material about themselves, and (b) err... we need a more explicit mechanism for harvesting GFDL text and adding it to WP, but we never get to this, because people seem to think that we have to discuss 'paid editors', not the mission. But anyway we can perfectly well set up pages for listing available online GFDL text about corporations, and perfectly well allow PR people to list things on such pages.
Charles
----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam
On 12/03/07, charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
Disagree. That isn't a strategy. What would be a strategy? Certainly (a) encourage corporations and others to post GFDL material about themselves, and (b) err... we need a more explicit mechanism for harvesting GFDL text and adding it to WP, but we never get to this, because people seem to think that we have to discuss 'paid editors', not the mission. But anyway we can perfectly well set up pages for listing available online GFDL text about corporations, and perfectly well allow PR people to list things on such pages.
Call it HypeWiki! (No?)
- d.
charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
"Jake Nelson" wrote
No matter what, people will be paid to edit. The questions is whetehr they'll bother to tell us.... let's make a registration requirement, and ban the hell out of anyone who violates it, and see where that takes us.
Disagree. That isn't a strategy. What would be a strategy? Certainly (a) encourage corporations and others to post GFDL material about themselves, and (b) err... we need a more explicit mechanism for harvesting GFDL text and adding it to WP, but we never get to this, because people seem to think that we have to discuss 'paid editors', not the mission. But anyway we can perfectly well set up pages for listing available online GFDL text about corporations, and perfectly well allow PR people to list things on such pages.
We need to get corporations on our side, not to be in a perpetual state of war with them. There is great value to what you propose. Many corporate documents are protected by copyrights. Where a person is paid to edit on behalf of a company he presumably has the right to act on behalf of the company when he releases these documents on a page that is covered by the GFDL. This frees up material whose use under copyright law might be uncertain.
Paying attention to the GFDL issue is more far-sighted than wallowing in allegations of conflict of interest.
Ec