[Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia-l Digest, Vol 21, Issue 53

[Rowan Collins]

On 4/22/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:

> I never said Bomis was a secret.

No, you called it a "semi-secret"; is that really that different? I'm
not sure it even strictly makes sense as a term (a bit like
"semi-unique"):
"And there is a little semi-secret that many people don't know: Bomis
is in the business of pornography (though, to be fair, they also do
other things)."

> Sure, there was never a sign posted at Wikipedia that
> said "Come Buy Porn from Bomis!", but the fact that much of the
> funding for Wikipedia comes directly or indirectly (ie, through you
> and other donors who profit from Bomis) from a business which makes
> "less than 10%" of its revenue through pornography.
 
So, really, why does it matter? Who cares? If you can point to a
single editorial decision, a single carrot or stick offered by Bomis,
or by Jimmy or any of its employees, that suggests that this
relationship has ever, in any way, had an influence on the structure,
content, community, or values of Wikipedia, then I will accept that it
is at least historically noteworthy. Until then, I really don't see
the need to continue to bring it into discussions.

I don't know whether Bomis should be classed as a porn portal with a
respectable front, or a general portal with a seedy backroom, or
neither, or something in between. And, to be perfectly honest, I don't
care - unless someone can demonstrate to me that it has made *any*
difference to Wikipedia besides giving its detractors something
unanswerably trivial to talk about.

-- 
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]