How does this relate to the English Wikipedia? This is really OT for the list, try foundation-l.

Are there any real concerns here? If so, I would be most ecstatic to discuss them.

David Gerard wrote: If there is, it will, and I did my searching. I did not find anything problematic. I honestly don't think anything will turn up, Jimmy is pretty straight forward. ./scream _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

I have an idea on how to conduct future fundraisers of wikipedia. We will get a jimbo and make him wear things and sell them on ebay. We could also sell Jimbo shaped pretzels

We could also sell Jimbo shaped pretzels

On 3/4/08, Screamer <scream(a)datascreamer.com> wrote: That's right. Jimmy routinely asks people on OTRS to look into articles that are one-sided when people ask him to. He had a conflict of interest here, which, for obvious reasons, he didn't want to disclose - so he suggested a smaller conflict of interest in his e-mail to OTRS as a reason for recusing himself from editing it. It would have been better to stay away from the matter entirely, obviously, but I don't see it as a big deal. I' m more worried that the community will now massively push it in the other direction as a reaction against perceived bias. There are two real stories here, IMHO: * a destructive, trashy kind of pseudo-journalism that invades people's personal lives under the pretense of a real story; * the destructiveness and maliciousness on the fringes of our own community. Jimmy not only created an extraordinary project -- he decided to make it based on the principles of the open source / free software movement, and turned it over to a non-profit organization. This was, by no means, the obvious thing to do: Had events played out a little differently today, Wikipedia would be a dot-com with ads, probably a subsidiary of Google, Microsoft or Yahoo. As community leader, Jimmy has developed and emphasized the values that we cherish: the assumption of good faith, the importance of neutrality in open collaboration, and the belief in a shared purpose. When he talks about bringing education to those who cannot afford it, he's not just trying to impress. Anyone who spends 5 minutes with him will understand that this is his personal life goal. Moreover, Jimmy stepped back graciously as Chair of the Foundation when he no longer could dedicate as much time as needed to the role. He's helped us connect with philanthropists here in the Bay Area -- donations like the recent 500,000 dollars from the last fundraiser were only possible because of his outreach efforts. His international network of contacts has helped us to build our Advisory Board, really smart people who have helped us on many occasions. He's been humble and helpful, and has always acted in the best interests of the organization. When people try to create a malicious caricature of the man, then please remind yourself that actions speak louder than words. And also ask what the self-interest is of those who make the attacks. -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Erik, possibly you are right, but aren't you posting in this apologia, in the wrong place? It seems to me this is just another example of the lousy public relations at which Wikipedia excels. You wait for the world's press to run the story, and then post to us here - truly amazing. Tell the world not the select few, and tell them yesterday. Giano

Telling the world's press about a "destructive, trashy kind of pseudo-journalism" is not likely to go down well when they recognise that the public, like it or not (I hate it) wants to read about the private lives of public figures.