[Foundation-l] Re: Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form New Partnership

[Anthere]

Chris Jenkinson wrote:

> GerardM wrote:
> 
>> People who know me, now that I do almost everthing to have the things I
>> believe in come true. They also know that i will not squander away the
>> values of what we stand for. When some person aggresively removes these
>> links, I will be sorry for the narrow mindedness that it demonstrates. It
>> must also be an admin to do this, I will wonder to what extend this
>> behaviour will be mitigated by him finding the funds that are lost to the
>> rest of us. This is the least I would expect of someone who is this 
>> position
>> of responibility.
> 
> 
> I don't think it is narrow-mindedness that would cause someone to remove 
> these links, and I think accusing someone of acting in this way is 
> rather impolite and shows a lack of good faith. I can't think of one 
> admin who doesn't have the best interests of Wikipedia at heart and is 
> only doing what they think best.
> 
> The thing is, a large number of people have not been convinced that this 
> is necessary for the Foundation's continued operations, but the 
> partnership is going against some of the ideals on which Wikipedia was 
> founded. At the moment, the impression I (and many others) am getting is 
> that this deal is allowing corporations to influence how the Foundation 
> operates. Some people do not mind; others do. It's up to the Board to 
> demonstrate that this is a good move, not up to the community to say why 
> it's a bad move. Saying "let's give it a trial and see what the results 
> are" isn't good enough.
> 
> Chris

I fully understand this concern, Chris, but at least in my part of the 
world, it is to the ones making an accusation to prove a person is wrong 
(or should I say guilty ?). By showing facts. Proofs. Numbers.

Not to the so-called guilty ones to prove they are innocents.

Right now, your fears may be understandable, and I am ready to listen to 
them, but your fears are words. Only words. They are suppositions. They 
are fears.
There is no way we can *prove* or *demonstrate* to the community that 
this deal is NOT gonna influence how the Foundation operates, but by 
telling you that this is not gonna change the way we think or act.

Answers.com does not have any members on the WMF board. Answers.com does 
not a share in our "company". They have no voting power. Nothing.

You, as an editor, have more power in raising a riot to have editors 
leave the project, than Answers.com have power to influence which 
decisions we will take. You, as an editor, have the power to kick Angela 
and myself from the board if you are not happy with us at next elections 
(and each time editors are not happy, they are quick to remind that to 
both of us). Any developer has more power to put the site to a halt if 
they are not happy with us. Answers.com can not do this.  Any admin on 
the english wikipedia has more power to protect an article than Bob has.

The way we can demonstrate it will be a good move is precisely by giving 
it a trial, showing the results and showing that Answers.com does *not* 
make decisions for us.

The way *you* can demonstrate you are correct in your fear that 
Answers.com will be our boss from now is to provide mails where they 
actually tell us what to do. Can you do this ? You can't because it is 
only a fear. It has no reality. Are we always gonna do nothing because 
of *fears* ? I am sorry, but no. The very idea of having a project 
editable by anyone, including jerks and pov people is more dangerous and 
crazy than the current deal. It was good enough 4,5 years ago.