On 22/10/05, Anthony DiPierro wikispam@inbox.org wrote:

For some reason I can't post to the foundation-l list... Feel free to forward this there if you want.

On 10/22/05, Dan Grey dangrey@gmail.com wrote:

...

On 22/10/05, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:

...

Yes, but I think mostly because Amazon is under a boycott by RMS for their patent policies.

Reading back through posts from that time, most the objections seem to be about the "slippery slope" - a quite understandable view. It's also notable that the income from the Amazon was pathetic - it would be nice if there was some assurance that this 1-Click business might actually be worthwhile before we try it.

They *are* doing a 6 month trial first. I think the revenue would be a lot better from this. I say this as someone who is running a mirror of Wikipedia with google ads on it.

...

I also note that the recent posts on the wiki are against this idea. The legal issues are very far from clear, and it's also apparent that there is opposition to this.

As one of the people most skeptical of this under that legal issues thread, I'd say it's pretty indisputable that it's legal. The only real question is whether or not there are tax consequences.

...

I think it was rather presumptious of the board to "announce" this without consulting editors first. The board may have "signed up" to a trial of this, but *we* haven't, and I think the board may well have a hard time stopping editors removing this advertisting from the site.

Answers Corporation is a public company, and there's some evidence that this deal might have affected the price of the stock. Part of the agreement was probably to keep the conversations confidential until a deal was made.

In any case, I believe that this is exactly the type of decision the board should be making on its own. If you don't like what the board is doing, by all means tell them, and then elect new members at the next election if they don't do a better job. But in my opinion the board needs the autonomy to make these decisions on its own.