I've been advised by more than one community member not to engage
further on this, but I need to correct what I see as a potentially
On 2/28/16 11:47 AM, Fæ wrote:
Jimmy Wales has never declared a conflict of interest or loyalty when
acting as a WMF trustee.
This is absolutely 100% false. I have always declared, formally and in
writing, my role at Wikia. I have additionally worked to make sure that
all board members know about it, and I have on multiple occasions
recused myself from votes where there could be a perceived or actual
conflict of interest.
In the current case, the board has not voted on anything like having a
general purpose search engine. That I tried to build an open source
search engine several years ago would not, in my view, have any bearing
on the decision not to do that, and if we were voting on doing something
like that, I would vote no - I think it's not possible with our
resources and therefore our limited resources are better used on
Additionally, as others have pointed out, Wikia is moving away from
Mediawiki. So even the idea that me thinking that Mediawiki should be
improved as a dastardly conspiracy doesn't really seem very persuasive.
Most recently Jimmy Wales has been arguing the case
introducing charges for commercial reusers of WMF services, with an
obvious reuser of MediaWiki code improvements and WMF supported open
project data being Wikia Inc.
You'd be more persuasive smearing me if you bothered to read what I
wrote. I support introducing charges for commercial reusers of WMF
services, in those cases where it makes sense to do so. I listed some
objections to that idea which I think are worthy of consideration, but I
come down on balance that the idea, in principle, is a good one.
I won't be engaging further with this kind of nonsense. There are
really important and interesting conversations that are happening here.