[Wikimedia-l] WMF employee writing articles for $300
Russavia
russavia.wikipedia at gmail.com
Mon Jan 6 01:15:31 UTC 2014
David,
Myself, I like Sarah, we've had some good and entertaining discussions, and
I even nominated her for RfA on Commons (
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators/Requests/SarahStierch).
My posting here has nothing to do with bitch-slapping Sarah (
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=75849#p75849). Odder has
presented information, which raises many questions, not necessarily of
Sarah, but of those in the Foundation hierachy who have publicly spoken out
about paid editing in general.
By all rights, if Sue's statement and Jimmy's
well-known-but-not-so-coherent position is meant to have teeth, Sarah
should also be served with a cease-and-desist notice for obvious paid
editing, and for violating the terms of use. Otherwise the cease-and-desist
notice the WMF sent to Wiki-PR (
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/11/19/wikimedia-foundation-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-to-wikipr/)
is basically worthless. I have, of course, taken the liberty to contact
Jordan French of Wiki-PR to advise them of Odder's blog, and of these
postings on this mailing list, so that they can follow it for their own
purposes, and see what public response comes from the powers-that-be at the
WMF.
So David, if you can stick to the topic instead of using nonsensical
personal attacks on myself, perhaps you can explain your position here. I
surely think that Sarah wouldn't appreciate your comments that people who
engage in paid editing are trying to "fuck up Wikipedia for commercial
advantage". Whilst we will obviously wait for Sarah to comment publicly
here, what do you see as being the difference between Wiki-PR and Sarah?
Should she be subjected to an en.wp community ban? Should she be served
with cease-and-desist notices from WMF legal? Or is it that insiders on our
projects are treated differently by the powers-that-be to those who don't
have that privilege? (We all know the answer to that last question!)
As to motives for the blog post, take it up with Odder, it's his post. My
motive in posting here is purely to generate discussion on obvious
"organizational issues of the Wikimedia Foundation"; and paid editing is
one of the major organizational issues of recent months, even looking at
Wales' talk page on en.wp, it is basically full of bright line, COI and
paid editing discussions, and has been for some time now.
Anyway, I look forward to hearing from Sarah on this issue, and again, she
has my support in regards to this issue.
Cheers,
Russavia
More information about the Wikimedia-l
mailing list