I suppose it helps having someone that knows absolutely nothing about the project to bullshit convincingly how wonderful it is ... especially for the best part of $472,000 a year and weekend trips to a romantic Amsterdam.
So why was every time-served Wikipedia free labor serf overlooked during her paid appointment?
Surely either that means that all of them are worth shit in the Eye of Whale ... or have just been treated like shit? Here she is in action ... http://cnettv.cnet.com/wikimedia-foundatio...1_53-32449.html
. That is, a video interview rather than any alleged Amsterdam action.
"Jimmy ... is a modest guy ... a frugal guy ... Jimmy has never done anything wrong ... he does not live well ... does not live a lavish lifestyle".
Alternatively, there is a $70,000 to $85,000 job up for grabs, here; http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/164977
and a couple of supporting paid jobs, here; http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/164978
One requirement of which is ... "* Track down and recruit "experts" upon the request of working group and sub-group members." CVs by May 31st.
QUOTE(Cock-up-over-conspiracy @ Mon 11th May 2009, 4:52pm)
Ha ... ha ... ha ... ha ... ha ... we're
earning $470,000 you dickheads!!!
"I am over the moon happy", said Sue Gardner,
executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation.
• Does Sue Gardner ever edit?
• Has Sue Gardner ever clerked an arbcom?
• Has Sue Gardner ever faced and dealt with one of the sociopaths wandering around her institution?
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 12th May 2009, 3:35am)
• and no (if by "sociopath" you mean the various Arbcom members.....)
Within the context of this topic, I suppose it is the Charitable Foundations that have to pay so that everyone can have their fun and push their POV then?This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: Tue 12th May 2009, 3:15pm