On 8/11/06, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/9/06, Ed Sanders ejsanders@gmail.com wrote:
His business model still works if the material he writes get used on Wikipedia - the agreement just means now he won't upload it unless we approve it first... as far as I understand it.
I don't like this middle ground at all. We need to be firmly either *for* or *against* paid editing. If we equivocate as we currently do, then you'll have people figuring out which articles are coming through this process and AfDing them all "because Jimmy said it was a conflict of interest". Either welcome it or ban it - where the hell do we stand right now?
Why do we have to have a clear position? I much prefer a society primarily made of equivocators than ideologues.
I don't see paid editing as necessarily sullying the editing in any way.
There's no need to be anti-capitalist.