QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Mon 27th August 2007, 3:16pm)
![*](style_images/brack/post_snapback.gif)
And the donations are the bottom line here. Unless, of course, Jimbo was planning on investing all of that "venture capital" that he got from Amazon for Wikia back into Wikipedia....hmm, Jimbo???
I disagree completely. Venture capital directed to Wikia is money rendered with a view towards making a profit. Wikipedia donations are charity. If Wikia gave that money to Wikipedia, they'd be contravening the agreement to use the money to develop the famous secret searchengine.DOT.COM that Wikia is going to magically invent (eyeroll). VC is supposed to make money for the investors, eventually. It isnt a donation. It is an investment (hence venture capital funding). They want a profit.
As for the window dressing thing, US regulatory authorities won't react to this. Its a so-what point. Both are wikis, and now they are making money, so that's good, from the American POV. This would tick Europeans off, but to Americans, they'd congratulate you on your brillance.
I think you guys are missing the point that
the no follow policy is equal to money. LOTS of money. Given the favoritism shown to Wikia, that's not only a clear conflict of interest, it is a solid financial contribution from Wikipedia to Wikia, and no one else gets it. Not even Amazon. Effectively,
Wikipedia is donating thousands to Wikia. Through free advertising. That's the thing you can nail them on.
As for the denigration of encyclopedias, banning of important articles (or innocent people, or nice people) or nasty people editing or admining... no one cares about that. Maybe in Europe, you can get sway with it, but in the U.S., they just don't care. You need fo find a way that they are violating some statute.
I'm sure that the no follow policy is the best route.
This post has been edited by Nathan: