Well then, why aren't you listening?
We've been begging WMF for years to come up with a solution for paid
editing. If you actually put something in the ToU against it, we can get
paid edit requests removed from sites like Upwork, since they will not
allow requests that violate another site's terms of service. But we've been
completely unable to get WMF to do something unequivocal like that, so we
get left to deal with the spam and crapvertising. Wikipedia admins get to
deal with the fallout.
In the meantime, we get a WMF "working group" wanting to not only allow
paid editing, but have WMF do the paying. That is the direct, exact
opposite of what we've been asking for! No paid editing, and certainly no
paid editing from WMF!
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working…
Why on Earth are we getting this garbage from WMF "working groups"? Do they
know nothing at all about how the projects work, or do they not care and
are trying to override them?
On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 4:07 PM Dariusz Jemielniak <darekj(a)alk.edu.pl>
wrote:
On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 6:00 PM Todd Allen <toddmallen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Then, why'd we hear something so dismissive
as this?
My intent was not dismissive, but factual (I basically made a point that a
majority of our communities is not interested in administration,
organization, structures, etc., so as to address an estimation error in the
discussion).
5-10 thousand people are still a large and definitely worth listening to
group.
best,
dj