[WikiEN-l] Corporate Donors - Status?

[Jason Calacanis]

> It could go either way. I remember thinking when looking at the
> [[Virgin United]] article last time that I would find it somewhat mean
> to be as hard-nosed towards their article as I might normally be. But
> I'm sure that other editors would be the opposite, perversely
> insisting on sources for *everything*, bringing up any dirt they can
> find, to challenge the notion that the company is getting a free ride
> on us.
> Steve

Steve,

The is exactly what would happen, in large part because of the
unprecedented sense of fairness and ethics by the core Wikipedians.
I've seen this in journalism from time to time, when journalists (at
good publications at least) become aware that someone is a sponsor
they become extra vigilant when covering those companies.

>> Oldak said: It seems insidious to dismiss anyone who holds this viewpoint
>> as "conspiracy theorists... (and in some cases insane)".

Fair enough Oldak. I didn't mean to say all folks, I'm talking about
that specific contingent who take any successful project and attack it
with theories that just don't exist (or are highly unlikely). I have
to learn to tone down my debates when talking to Wikipedians.... Jimbo
is giving me private lessons in that. :-)

best j
---------------------
Jason McCabe Calacanis
Entrepreneur in Action, Sequoia Capital
Mobile: 310-456-4900
My blog: http://www.calacanis.com
AOL IM/Skype: jasoncalacanis