The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

9 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Paid editing, finally gets a full discussion
Somey
post Wed 10th June 2009, 4:44pm
Post #21


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(Hipocrite @ Wed 10th June 2009, 8:22am) *
Being an expert in Market Research does not make one an expert in Public Relations, the same way that being an expert in Financial Economics does not make one an expert in Sociology. One might be related to the other, but they're disparate diciplines.

I'd say you're somewhat confused, though this statement of yours is slightly more reasonable at least. (OTOH, it's still not particularly relevant to what we're discussing...) Basically "Market Research" is an activity, "Public Relations" is an industry. Market Research takes place within the PR industry (or more accurately, the Advertising/PR industry); the difference between Market Research that takes place within the context of Product Development and that which takes place within the context of Advertising/PR is that the latter is usually placed in the hands of agencies, whereas the former is usually done internally, and often in secret. "Financial Economics" isn't really a subset of Sociology, IMO.

QUOTE
I DONT LIKE WHAT HE'S SAYING! BAN HIM! BAN HIM!

We don't usually ban people for being wrong, unless they're doing it deliberately and maliciously. In your case I suspect there's a smidgen of that, but for the most part I think you just don't know what the hell you're talking about.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Thu 11th June 2009, 2:40am
Post #22


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



Jimbo has kicked it up a notch.

The battle over whether or not to allow paid editing on Wikipedia, two-and-a-half years after I made it famous, is now being fought tooth and nail. Jimmy Wales kicked it up a notch, declaring "policy" where he (probably) no longer holds the reputation capital to pull it off. The current box score:

Paid editing - 52
Jimmy Wales - 22.

In American football, that's a blowout, folks.

What I'm wondering -- where the heck are JzG, Calton, and Sam Blanning? We need those guys to get the fire REALLY HOT.

As for Jimbo's comment... I enjoy how in paragraph two he says, "I think the opening statement on this page is a red herring." Then in paragraph three he says, "Are we free and independent scribes doing our best to record all human knowledge? Or are we paid shills. I know what I choose."

Also, "Just imagine the disaster for our reputation."

Spoken like someone who knows intimately about disasters and reputations.

This post has been edited by thekohser: Thu 11th June 2009, 2:45am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jon Awbrey
post Thu 11th June 2009, 2:46am
Post #23


τὰ δέ μοι παθήματα μαθήματα γέγονε
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,783
Joined: Sun 6th Apr 2008, 4:52am
From: Meat Puppet Nation
Member No.: 5,619

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 10th June 2009, 10:40pm) *

QUOTE(Jimbo Wales @ 10 June 2009)

Are we free and independent scribes doing our best to record all human knowledge? Or are we paid shills. I know what I choose.


!

We know, too, Jimbo.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Thu 11th June 2009, 2:50am
Post #24


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



Oh, Jeez. Shut it down. It's over. Jimbo just got consecutive supports from:

SlimVirgin

Sam Blacketer

JoshuaZ


It's over, Root. You're done. You're finished. Wikipedia's three most respected authorities on ethical behavior and guarding against reputation disasters have weighed in -- one, two, three. You lost, man. Nice try.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TungstenCarbide
post Thu 11th June 2009, 2:57am
Post #25


Allegedly shot down by stray Ukrainian missile
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,405
Joined: Sat 14th Mar 2009, 6:12am
Member No.: 10,787

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 11th June 2009, 2:40am) *
As for Jimbo's comment... I enjoy how in paragraph two he says, "I think the opening statement on this page is a red herring." Then in paragraph three he says, "Are we free and independent scribes doing our best to record all human knowledge? Or are we paid shills. I know what I choose."


Oh . My . God.

Jimbo's been suckleling at the teat for years now; from speaking fees to Russian massage parlors to Wikia to pussy.

"we"

This is the first I've heard of Jimbo being a humble scribe.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cock-up-over-conspiracy
post Thu 11th June 2009, 4:25am
Post #26


Now censored by flckr.com and who else ... ???
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,693
Joined: Sat 6th Dec 2008, 6:08am
Member No.: 9,267



Interesting ... the third person to become involved in this debate is the David 'Shankbone' Miller himself who we recently discussed receiving big hand outs, and multiple opportunities of professional advancement, care of the Israeli government.

Sadly, there are none of his pictures of pissing Zionist goats or engorged genitalia in this topic though. All the same, I am pretty sure that you could find perverts who would pay to have pictures of their genitals on a top ranking website like the Wikipedia.

Could I just flag up a little inequality and imbalance here, what he and they are, basically, say is

"we get paid to write, shoot sponsored photos, stretch the limits of what are 'facts' or what is 'PR' or not, use the Wikipedia for our own personal advancement ... the lowly serfs then have to pay with their time to police us for free and the unpaid janitors (admins) waste their time over the disputes that will arise".

Time is also money. Likewise, could someone also widen the discussion that not all "paid for" editing and POV creation is "paid for" per se ... palm greasing comes in many subtle forms as above; sponsorship, back scratching, blow jobs etc.
QUOTE
Users who endorse this summary:

rootology ©(T) 19:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
>David Shankbone 19:37, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
QUOTE
Statement by David Shankbone

I have always supported paid editing if you can get that work. Unfortunately, in the past the person/people most associated with paid editing are unpleasant and disliked; thus, the issue has been paired with them.

It's time to review the idea outside of the past, and ask why our other policies and guidelines will not take care of perceived WP:COI issues. They would. Paid editing happens; only diligent review of material for NPOV, V and OR will circumvent problems with any of our material, paid or unpaid. -->David Shankbone 19:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

And surely spoken like a true whore ...
QUOTE
At the end of the day, our core policies are our core policies, and collusion--for whatever motivation--to circumvent our core policies is cause for sanctions. I think Root's main point with this RFC is that ...

money is no more odious an incentive than fandom, love, identification or ideology ... for writing about a subject.

-->David Shankbone 20:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: Thu 11th June 2009, 4:30am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Thu 11th June 2009, 4:52am
Post #27


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Cock-up-over-conspiracy @ Wed 10th June 2009, 9:25pm) *

And surely spoken like a true whore ...
QUOTE
At the end of the day, our core policies are our core policies, and collusion--for whatever motivation--to circumvent our core policies is cause for sanctions. I think Root's main point with this RFC is that ...

money is no more odious an incentive than fandom, love, identification or ideology ... for writing about a subject.

-->David Shankbone 20:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)



Time for the Devil's Advocate bit. While I'm no fan of Shankbone or his work, I do happen to agree with his specific sentiment, above. Moreover, I see nothing wrong with "whores" (though it's a rather loaded word). Whores of various sorts can be (though are not always) refreshingly honest. There are far worse things than honest whores, and one of them is dishonest whores. Let COIs be declared and caveat emptor (or lector).

Furthermore, if somebody like Shankbone says that time is money, that doesn't mean it's not true.

Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Thu 11th June 2009, 5:35am
Post #28


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 10th June 2009, 11:52pm) *
Time for the Devil's Advocate bit. While I'm no fan of Shankbone or his work, I do happen to agree with his specific sentiment...

But it's still self-serving, because of the classic Wikipedian conflation tactic. In fact, money really is a more odious incentive than love (I'm sure Greg would tell you the same thing), and probably more odious than fandom, though that depends on what the person is a fan of. It's significantly less odious than ideology, though that depends on where you're sitting ideologically. As for "identification," by that he presumably means that people who are "in the closet" in terms of sexual orientation should be forced out of the closet by people like Shankers himself, or at least that's what Shankers' past actions would tend to suggest. And money is far less odious an incentive than that, at least in my opinion.

QUOTE
Furthermore, if somebody like Shankbone says that time is money, that doesn't mean it's not true.

It's a "humanocentric" statement, though, which depends on an individual's time being such that a dollar amount can be assigned to it. This is essentially what Jimbo is afraid of, and indeed what he should be afraid of. If unpaid editors start having to work with editors who are being paid, they're going to start thinking that maybe voluntarism isn't all it's cracked up to be. In reality it has nothing to do with the integrity of the paid editors; rather it has everything to do with the simmering resentment of the unpaid ones, and the attrition that will probably result.

Remember, they could have allowed this years ago, and think of all the money they all could have made in the meantime. I'm thinking maybe hundreds of dollars! confused.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guido den Broeder
post Thu 11th June 2009, 9:56am
Post #29


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 425
Joined: Thu 19th Feb 2009, 7:31pm
Member No.: 10,371



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 11th June 2009, 4:40am) *

Ah, his 'advocate' rant again. The definition of advocate on Wikipedia seems to range from 'anyone who tries to balance a BLP article about a certain someone's friend or idol' to 'anyone who doesn't support the biased view of whoever owns the article'.

Now if I would be unblocked for a minute, I could point them to some obnoxious paid editors. O wait - I already did that, and nobody cared.

This post has been edited by Guido den Broeder: Thu 11th June 2009, 9:57am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sbrown
post Thu 11th June 2009, 11:37am
Post #30


Senior Member
****

Group: Inactive
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu 21st May 2009, 9:14am
Member No.: 11,840



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 11th June 2009, 3:50am) *

Jimbo just got consecutive supports from:

SlimVirgin

Sam Blacketer

JoshuaZ


Thats a remarkable coincidence. Obviously there completely independent since theres no way anyone so senior in WP would stoop to a behind the scenes canvas.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
carbuncle
post Thu 11th June 2009, 1:59pm
Post #31


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,601
Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm
Member No.: 5,544



QUOTE
People pay me to research things and write reports. I also research things of my own interest in my spare time. Never the twain shall or should meet. Sam Blacketer (talk) 22:53, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Um, is this the same Sam Blacketer recently embroiled in the "providing potted bios of UK politicians for money" among other scandals? Am I missing something? Again?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Thu 11th June 2009, 2:06pm
Post #32


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(Somey @ Thu 11th June 2009, 1:35am) *

Remember, they could have allowed this years ago, and think of all the money they all could have made in the meantime. I'm thinking maybe hundreds of dollars! confused.gif


Well, it's probably more like a couple thousand dollars... but, who's arguing?

As for the mind-set of a true, underground Wikipedia paid editor... let me give you the insight in my mind.

When I am under contract with a person or corporation to write an article about said person or corporation, I have very, very, very little interest in presenting an "advocacy" position on behalf of that entity. Rather, success is measured in durability within Wikipedia, so my highest priority is...

...wait for it... ...because this is important... ...many, many hours of learning have gone into this outcome, so you'd better appreciate it...

How do I write (and publish) this article in such a way that it passes WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:RS, and all the other WP:things, while simultaneously NOT DRAWING THE ATTENTION OF THE HIVE?

Guess what? The articles that result are pretty bland, not puff pieces, quite encyclopedic, and (ever since I learned this technique) 100% durable within Wikipedia -- with surprisingly little follow-up maintenance, and likewise lasting appreciation of my clients.

That's why Jimmy Wales is such a one-dimensionally thinking man, that he feels the need to frame my work as "paid shill" and the like. In order to rally his equally one-dimensional followers, he has to demonize the paid editing effort, because it is potentially, in fact, so non-sinister in its undetectability. My paid content is virtually indistinguishable from the other crap on Wikipedia, except for the fact that, perhaps, it is of a higher encyclopedic and "neutral" quality.

So, thanks to Rootology, we've got our drama-of-the-week on Wikipedia, and I'm free to go back to paid editing that is undetectable and indistinguishable within the world's most irresponsible encyclopedia.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
carbuncle
post Thu 11th June 2009, 2:12pm
Post #33


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,601
Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm
Member No.: 5,544



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 11th June 2009, 2:06pm) *

So, thanks to Rootology, we've got our drama-of-the-week on Wikipedia, and I'm free to go back to paid editing that is undetectable and indistinguishable within the world's most irresponsible encyclopedia.

Surely the world's most irresponsible encyclopedia is "The Home Encyclopedia of Fireworks and Incendiary Devices for Children"?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Thu 11th June 2009, 2:19pm
Post #34


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 11th June 2009, 9:06am) *
How do I write (and publish) this article in such a way that it passes WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:RS, and all the other WP:things, while simultaneously NOT DRAWING THE ATTENTION OF THE HIVE?

Guess what? The articles that result are pretty bland, not puff pieces, quite encyclopedic, and (ever since I learned this technique) 100% durable within Wikipedia -- with surprisingly little follow-up maintenance, and likewise lasting appreciation of my clients.

Well, I would have pointed that out too, but I didn't want to give away any trade secrets! smile.gif

But yes, I believe you're absolutely right - a "paid editor" is going to have a huge incentive to produce highly-finished articles on practically the initial (new-page) edit (so as to avoid attention from RC patrollers), keep his/her head down in general, and not get into serious arguments with anyone over anything, if at all possible. Whereas someone who's known to be getting paid who is also argumentative and "tendentious" probably isn't going to be getting paid for long, and should probably look for a new line of work.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guido den Broeder
post Thu 11th June 2009, 2:45pm
Post #35


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 425
Joined: Thu 19th Feb 2009, 7:31pm
Member No.: 10,371



Unless, of course, you get paid to write a biased article and to keep it biased with all your might.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Thu 11th June 2009, 2:46pm
Post #36


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



Is this comment a joke?

QUOTE
I know in my soul that this project will flounder if we don't follow Jimbo's example of being free and independent scribes. Jimbo, let me know if you need anything; I'll be right here under the table. It's my honor and right to wash your articles while you receive sleep or other good and valuable consideration. --[[User talk:NE2|NE2]] 12:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Wales Hunter
post Thu 11th June 2009, 2:52pm
Post #37


Hackenslasher
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined: Sun 30th Dec 2007, 11:29pm
Member No.: 4,319

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Paid editing de facto exists anyway.

Does anyone really think political aides, who are paid to aid their political masters, don't tweak Wikipedia for the benefit of their own party?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A Horse With No Name
post Thu 11th June 2009, 4:36pm
Post #38


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,471
Joined: Mon 26th Jan 2009, 1:54pm
Member No.: 9,985



QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 10th June 2009, 10:40pm) *


Also, "Just imagine the disaster for our reputation."



What reputation? bored.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cedric
post Thu 11th June 2009, 7:13pm
Post #39


General Gato
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,648
Joined: Sun 11th Mar 2007, 5:58pm
From: God's Ain Country
Member No.: 1,116

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 11th June 2009, 9:46am) *

Is this comment a joke?

QUOTE
I know in my soul that this project will flounder if we don't follow Jimbo's example of being free and independent scribes. Jimbo, let me know if you need anything; I'll be right here under the table. It's my honor and right to wash your articles while you receive sleep or other good and valuable consideration. --[[User talk:NE2|NE2]] 12:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


Unfortunately, probably not. NE2 is a roadster, who are not known for their sense of humor (this is what passes for "humor" amongst roadsters).
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TungstenCarbide
post Thu 11th June 2009, 8:43pm
Post #40


Allegedly shot down by stray Ukrainian missile
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,405
Joined: Sat 14th Mar 2009, 6:12am
Member No.: 10,787

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 11th June 2009, 2:46pm) *

Is this comment a joke?

QUOTE
I know in my soul that this project will flounder if we don't follow Jimbo's example of being free and independent scribes. Jimbo, let me know if you need anything; I'll be right here under the table. It's my honor and right to wash your articles while you receive sleep or other good and valuable consideration. --[[User talk:NE2|NE2]] 12:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC)



Looks damn funny to me. Double entendres [sole] 'flounder', washing jimbo's [dirty laundry] articles. Not sure what 'under the table' is supposed to mean ...

This post has been edited by TungstenCarbide: Thu 11th June 2009, 8:53pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

9 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd 11 17, 1:09pm