COI Request for Comment Options

[It's the blimp, Frank]

Has anyone started a thread on this yet? (link to RfC) I am struck by the fact that there is plenty of highly intelligent discussion there. I like this comment by Jclemens:

Likewise, editors who violate our content guidelines can do so just as easily out of personal ideology as they can for direct or indirect monetary gain.

I think also that people who have a genuine problem with COI are not likely to disclose it, so there is no point in penalizing the honest editors who do disclose it. The "View by Hipocrite" backs up my hunch that he is a significant dick. He says that "Wikipedia, the community, does an incredibly poor job of protecting its editors who attempt to stem the tide of this torrent of disinformation" -- and of course, it's always the other guy who is making a torrent of disinformation, and it's always you and your crew trying to stem the tide with your own torrent of "correct" information.

This post has been edited by It's the blimp, Frank:

[thekohser]

I'm not trying to give myself any big ups here, but I do find it interestingly ironic that such a discussion would be had on Wikipedia without so much as reaching out for an outside comment from the founder of the world's first and longest-running enterprise dedicated specifically to editing Wikipedia in exchange for payment.

[Vigilant]

I'm not trying to give myself any big ups here, but I do find it interestingly ironic that such a discussion would be had on Wikipedia without so much as reaching out for an outside comment from the founder of the world's first and longest-running enterprise dedicated specifically to editing Wikipedia in exchange for payment.

"Pay attention to meeeEEEeeeEEEeee"

[thekohser]

I'm not trying to give myself any big ups here, but I do find it interestingly ironic that such a discussion would be had on Wikipedia without so much as reaching out for an outside comment from the founder of the world's first and longest-running enterprise dedicated specifically to editing Wikipedia in exchange for payment.

"Pay attention to meeeEEEeeeEEEeee"

Well, that's exactly what I was trying not to say here, but your taunt is duly humorous. I really don't need to weigh in on their process, nor do I need any more exposure for my business -- I'm chock full of clients right now. I was just pointing out what seemed to be a bit odd. It would be like hosting a page discussing "the origins of Wikipedia", but not inviting Sanger to say a few words.

Does anyone else find it odd, or am I off-base here?

[melloden]

I'm not trying to give myself any big ups here, but I do find it interestingly ironic that such a discussion would be had on Wikipedia without so much as reaching out for an outside comment from the founder of the world's first and longest-running enterprise dedicated specifically to editing Wikipedia in exchange for payment.

"Pay attention to meeeEEEeeeEEEeee"

Well, that's exactly what I was trying not to say here, but your taunt is duly humorous. I really don't need to weigh in on their process, nor do I need any more exposure for my business -- I'm chock full of clients right now. I was just pointing out what seemed to be a bit odd. It would be like hosting a page discussing "the origins of Wikipedia", but not inviting Sanger to say a few words.

Does anyone else find it odd, or am I off-base here?

I don't think it's odd at all. They've all been told that you're a "long term abusive user" or whatever they call people they dislike.

Only a rational group of people would ask you for a comment Gregory.

[thekohser]

I don't think it's odd at all. They've all been told that you're a "long term abusive user" or whatever they call people they dislike.

Only a rational group of people would ask you for a comment Gregory.

Oh, to clarify... I agree with you 100%, that it's not odd for WIKIPEDIOTS to not even consider gathering my opinion on this matter. I am not of the body, so I am a non-person to them.

I guess what I really meant to ask was, "Wouldn't it be odd for a normal, educational, non-profit charity to have a public discussion on a key subject, but not even consider soliciting the input of the longest-acting player in the subject field?"