[WikiEN-l] Is editing for payment a fundamentally problematic conflict of...

[Bartning at aol.com]

In a message dated 3/5/2007 9:44:50 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
nobs03 at gmail.com writes:

There  are various techniques in the Internal Revenue Manual that could  be
employed; for example, reviewing the edit contributions of an employee  of a
non-profit organization, a reasonable estimate of manhours allocated  by that
non-profit organization over a given period of time would meet  standards of
proof to establish income from paid editing, as well as the  activities of
the employer, not to mention possible conflicts of interest,  or violations
of Wikipedia's internal policies.



<Many nonprofits begin for a reason, and experts in the field such as  Jerold 
Panas, (_Making the Case_), talk about how it should be the cause and not  
profit or money that has importance for nonprofits.  How would you include  
founders who don't even get paid in this witch hunt?  What about for-profit  
corporations, which I would think is worse since it's just publicity and not a  
cause they're more likely after?
 
Wikipedia itself has backing from a public-benefit charity really, the  
Wikimedia Foundation.  However, others in the nonprofit industry have  talked about 
how it's money venture - to show self efficiency or  something.
 
Vincent Bartning>
<BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free 
email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at 
http://www.aol.com.