I think bullying you is very risky Kolbe as you have half a dozen equally
warped friends who do little else but tear into Wikipedia and Wikipedians at
every possible opportunity. Indeed, I believe at least one or two are
actually claiming publicly to be professional journalists taking money for
articles which basically have a theme of tearing into the Wiki projects and
targeting community members at every possible opportunity. Would he need to
put this on his User page as a Declaration of Interest so that other
Wikipedians know that he has a paid for agenda when talking to them?
Your orchestrations of Wikipediocracys rather pathetic attempts to see
conspiracy and subterfuge where there is none does you no service and people
should think seriously when talking to you in any Wikipedian forum as your
track record suggests you are unlikely to use what you hear for good.
(Mr Kolbe is
the blonde guy 2-3 down from the top on the left for those keen to be on
their guard if he comes calling) And the whole of this site is dedicated to
tearing down people and undermining the whole Wiki Project, if any of you
reading this are unclear.
You and your little chums decided I was liable to be up to something
without a single shred of evidence. But I suppose Wikipediaocracy does not
need evidence and that would simply be cumbersome, particularly when you
have tame journalists in the States wholl print any claptrap you tell them,
which you can then hold up as conclusive proof of something that does not
exist. I think it highly amusing to see your chums speculating on whether
gaps in my editing record and small bursts of edits mean I was paid sums of
cash for practising editing by moving French text from the French Wikipedia
to the English stub about a town where my Mum-in-Law lives and where my wife
(see your sites recent trawl over my own website in screen grab below).
I spent three years of my life trying to get a Chapter functioning in the UK
so that we could build relationships with institutions, encourage people to
learn, encourage people to pick up ICT skills and think about how they can
apply all that is good about Wikipedia and the other projects to their
lives. My business was effectively put on hold, ticking over during that
time. Although I was a Director and owner of that business I and it never so
much as promoted itself on any occasion to anyone anywhere when I was
working. So get your creepy sad little friends off my case. The Chapter
actually owes me money. I took no expenses during the first year of its
existence with me on the Board and I have not submitted expenses for the
work I carried out February to May this year.
Your ridiculous fellow conspiracy theorists have said my PR links are some
kind of evil proof of me cashing in on my connections. Lets kill that one
off now too. Jimmy Wales went to see a big PR agency last January after
outing them as doing paid for editing. In attendance were PRCA & CIPR people
who were very unhappy at the complete disconnect between the PR world and
ours and wanted to kick a dialogue off to see if there was any hope in hell
of sorting this out. I started that dialogue. I told them THEY had to show
good faith and start doing something for us before wed even begin to
consider them as anything other than dodgy and dubious. They agreed. The
two PR groups then asked some individual PR people to work Pro-Bono for us
on promoting Monmouthpedia. This is what happened. The CIPR also talked to
the younger social media PR crowd amongst its members and asked them to get
a working paper together for discussion so that OUR community and their
community could begin to talking to try and bridge the unbridgeable divide
that may well divide us from the PR world. Note talking not taking cash,
not having freebies nothing.
You and your crowd are a cancer undermining the Wiki Projects. The perpetual
attacks on people devoting their time for free will ultimately result in no
one coming forward to stand for the Board as idiots from this site will be
looking at their Directorships, trolling their website looking for a word
here or there out of place or whipping up a incompetent journalist to write
utter nonsense about them and then holding it up as some kind of major
discovery of a plot to usurp donors money for personal gain.
I personally liked and was proud of achieving things for the benefit of the
chapter working with a leading member to achieve charitable status.
Organising Jimmy Wales 10th Birthday of Wikipedia celebration talks in
Bristol in January of last year. Persuading people to give freely of their
time to promote an excellent world first in Monmouth. Do you know Ive never
seen nearly 300 major articles across 38 countries about something Wikipedia
has done all positive across a 3-5 day period? Have you?
I know you are your Wikipediocracy chronies can boast the reverse and that
youve got tonnes of negative coverage. But that to me suggests how warped
you are your chronies sets of values are. If you had a shred of decency
youd walk away from a set of projects that you seem to despise.
Before I get another 10 pages on Wikipediocracy for being honest about what
you and your tiny band do, let me stress this is a personal view.
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Andreas
Sent: 20 September 2012 12:21
To: UK Wikimedia mailing list
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Paid editing by Roger Bamkin
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Craig Franklin <cfranklin(a)wikimedia.org.au>
Good grief, the only way that someone could come to that conclusion
from what you've quoted is if they had a rather severe case of
paranoia or were overly fond of conspiracy theories. Teaching people
how to use Wikipedia, what villainy and wickedness! I'm not surprised
that Roger isn't dignifying this nonsense with a direct response, and
I can't say I blame him either.
We are not just talking about teaching people how to use Wikipedia. We are
talking about people being paid to teach members of the public to edit
Wikipedia, for projects that in some cases are openly described and sold as
marketing initiatives. Does your chapter have programmes like that?
As the minutes and disclosure statements show, Roger has been pretty
clear about this with the board and with the members at the AGM, and
the information you are dredging up is all on the public record. If
there is a grand conspiracy here to secretly "a programme to secure
unemployed Wikipedian friends paid employment", then it's a pretty
inept one. Rather than Roger resigning, I think it would be better if
you just stopped trolling this list.
Don't try to bully me. I voted for Roger in this year's board election. That
was before the Geovation bid, and before he became a paid consultant for the
government of Gibraltar a fact which the Spanish daily of record, El País,
pointed out this morning is not noted on his Wikipedia user page. That's an
oversight that should be fixed.
The El País article is currently on the elpais.com
front page (not sure
about the paper edition). Regardless of whether there is impropriety or not,
it is hardly possible to claim that the appearance of impropriety has been