 Paid editing by slander artists, at the Top levels.... |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| nobs |
Post
#1
|
|
#2242 most prolific contributor of out of 1 million+ WP users  Group: Regulars Posts: 575 Joined: From: North America Member No.: 16  |
From Wikien-1
QUOTE Rob Smith nobs03 at gmail.com Mon Mar 5 17:44:31 UTC 2007 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. QUOTE Mercenary Wikipedian mercenarywikipedian at hotmail.com Wed Mar 7 21:48:11 UTC 2007 What does any of this have to do with Wikipedia? There are already policies in place regarding NPOV and NPA, and there are multiple dispute resolution processes in place to handle serial/chronic non-compliance. What protections does _anyone_ have against defamation on Wikipedia? Well, if they are the subject of an article there is WP:BLP. If they are just an editor and not the subject of the article there is the policy mandating No Personal Attacks. What makes you think these won't work if people are getting paid? Is this an issue of scalability? If so, it seems a little late to be worried about whether or not the idea of Wikipedia is scalable. QUOTE Rob Smith nobs03 at gmail.com Wed Mar 7 22:22:46 UTC 2007 None is addressed in current policies. And there is evidence Wikipedia is being used for purposes *other than* writing an encyclopedia, i.e. to target certain individuals and smear their character. The Daniel Brandt episode is one such case. Stephen Kinsella and the Ludwig von Mises Institute is another. The Free Congress Foundation and Paul Weyrich is a target for much questionable content being added, as well as an anonymous editor who identified himself as a professional journalist and friend of Weyrich received a community ban for efforts to instill NPOV & fairness in those two articles. By contrast, User:Katefan0 of *Scripps Howard* did precisely the samething as Weyrich's friend, admitted a conflict of interest prior to initiating official Wikipedia Dispute Resolution Policy, was promoted to Admin, presented evidence before Arbitrators admitting her conflict of interest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...ty_and_bullying yet the Arbs used her evidence against an aggrieved party. There are numerous other instances to be cited where a pattern is established that the intent of some parties, acting as agents of others, are using Wikipedia to pursue their own aims and not constructively contribute to the encyclopedia. QUOTE Slim Virgin slimvirgin at gmail.com Wed Mar 7 22:29:04 UTC 2007 Rob Smith (User:Nobs) has just named a former admin who did not choose to name herself. Can the people monitoring the list step in, please? QUOTE David Gerard dgerard at gmail.com Wed Mar 7 22:34:39 UTC 2007 That was indeed the last straw. He's on mod now. |
   |
 
|
  |
Replies
| Somey |
Post
#2
|
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post) Group: Moderators Posts: 11,816 Joined: From: Dreamland Member No.: 275 |
I was sorry to see that, actually. What are your plans now?
Not to drop any hints or anything, but Hawaii is nice this time of year... |
|
|
|
| nobs |
Post
#3
|
|
#2242 most prolific contributor of out of 1 million+ WP users Group: Regulars Posts: 575 Joined: From: North America Member No.: 16 |
QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 7th March 2007, 10:54pm)  I was sorry to see that, actually. What are your plans now? Not to drop any hints or anything, but Hawaii is nice this time of year... The next logical step: present the information before the Foundation. http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/found...rch/028220.html http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/found...rch/028225.html This is not a problem of persons or personalities, finding a fall guy like Essjay for example, who really is just a victim of his own stupidity in a war he never understood. It's a cumulative systemic problem that cannot be understood without looking a specific examples, who may happen to be Admins or subjects of BLP. And constantly impugning motives not only shields our eyes from investigating these institutional problems, it's also part of the larger accumulated institutional problem. The User:SlimVirgin, for example, who may or may not be a real person, I don't know and I don't give a crap, really has caused a serious problem for the Foundation; and this is evidenced by yesterdays actions when she reinserted questionable third party source material after agreeing the same source was ( 1 ) questionable ( 2 ) innapropriate. She did not review potentially defamatory material in a BLP before inserting it. And she writes the damn policies. Given that the Foundation has tasked her to author thier policies, and she has proven herself incapabale of making a spot editorial judgement about questionable, potentially slanderous, and defamatory material, she showed herself to be a machine programed executor of Foundation policy. |
|
|
|
Posts in this topic
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: |