Directory:WikBack/Jimmy Wales

Forum Discussions

Author Information

Author

Thekohser

Registered

12/28/07

Posts

223

Location

Pennsylvania

Conversation Threads

Post 1: Jimbo Wales

This is all nonsense, and anyone who thinks that Kelly is a proper place to get an understanding of my views should reconsider and ask me directly.

Post 2: Gregory (Thekohser)

Jimmy, I sent you a 12-paragraph email on December 24th, which I have poked you a couple of times about getting your feedback. You responded on Facebook that you hadn't looked at the email (because you're busy with Wikia Search). Understandable. But, when you find the time to come here and write posts -- posts which even say that we should ask you directly about things -- I feel a bit at odds that I have still not received your reply to my email from over a week ago.

Post 3: Kelly Martin

Also, a little advice on dealing with Jimbo in email: don't send long messages and don't make more than one point in your email. If you make more than one point, Jimbo will respond only to one of them (typically the one that is easiest to respond to) and ignore the others. The only way to have any hope of getting him to address the point you want him to address is to make it the only point discussed in the email. Save all others until later.

Post 4: Gregory (Thekohser)

Kelly, that's too funny, because I have already learned that about Jimbo! I had an old boss who would do the same thing. Problem with this last email was that it was in response to Jimbo saying that for me to move forward, I had to understand that back in October 2006, I 'did flatly lie.' Jimbo asked me to explain to him how 'it' was 'not a lie.' Honestly, I couldn't even put my finger on what 'lie' he was talking about, so I decided to recap the entire story of MyWikiBiz and Jimbo Wales, just in case he had developed some alternate history of the facts in his mind. Before I could even put together my email response, Jimbo sent me another email saying he was 'seriously willing to forgive and forget' but that I need to 'own up' to my own 'failings here.' Again, if we could just get these 'failings' nailed down, we'd be in much better shape. That I went a bit cuckoo when he couldn't thoughtfully discuss the WP:COI policy and instead wrote 'Absolutely unacceptable, sorry'? Yeah, I guess that was a 'failing' on my part. That I went a bit cuckoo when he deleted the Arch Coal article, calling it a 'travesty of NPOV,' even though a couple dozen other members of the community thought it was quite fine? Yeah, I guess that was a 'failing' on my part. That I went a bit cuckoo when a then-anonymous administrator of Wikipedia publicly said that I had 'given misleading information to journalists' but wouldn't back that up in public, and at first thought she read about it in The Signpost, but couldn't come up with the cite? Yeah, I guess that was a 'failing' on my part, but we all saw where that line of weak accusations finally ended up. So, anyway, yes -- I've noticed that same thing about Jimbo and email.

Post 5: JzG

The answer's in the question. Try something closer to *one* paragraph - preferably a short one. I guess Jimmy gets even more email than I do, and I get between 500 and 1,000 daily.

Post 6: MPerel

Meanwhile, just my two cents on the situation bubbling here... I'm surprised and disconcerted to observe the growing crowd of banned people who seem to be some of the best, innovative, creative, strong editors...people with great ideas and much to potentially contribute. Thekohser, for example (and many others), seems like someone WP would want on its team. Something seems amiss that these people are so easily excluded...

Post 7: Michael David

The purpose of the Cage Match Forum is to provide a place where two persons can act out and hopefully work out their differences regarding an issue. The title merely states who is involved, to differentiate it from other matches. And neither one has to 'win.' Sometimes matches end in a draw, where the two parties agree to disagree.

Post 8: Mike Halterman

I love this area. And if the name 'Cage Match' isn't exactly sunshine and rainbows, then so what? Life isn't about sunshine and rainbows. You deal and you move on.

Post 9: Swatjester

Who cares? It's the cage match. At least we have an outlet to flame away and vent to keep it off-wiki.

Post 10: privatemusings

I think the cage match was kind of intended as a venting place where people could go if civility deteriorated, but they wished to continue... the forum equivalent of 'taking this outside.' It's necessary for many forums to keep boards functional - but being such nice people, I don't think it's proven necessary here yet.

I too don't really feel the title of this board actually helps matters much (not that it's particularly getting in the way either, that I can see) - and certainly it would be silly for people to start flinging insults and invective just because they're here..... that's my take, for you morons. (That's a joke.)

Post 11: Gregory (Thekohser)

Thank you, Jimmy. Please take your time, if it means that you'll thoughtfully consider everything I have to say, and/or for you to look up relevant diffs that might illuminate how we so noticeably 'broke down' in October 2006. It is a shame, as the new post here suggests. I really think I could have helped Wikipedia immensely, given the proper attribution and supervision that would have come with a more forgiving COI policy. After all, we still have the Reward Board in place on Wikipedia, and there is now $20,000 of Philip Greenspun's money ready to pay illustrators, so the thought of money changing hands for contributions is certainly not opposed by a 'supermajority' on Wikipedia. The rub is whether a paid editor can ever be sufficiently neutral (or managed by the community to be neutral) so that one of the pillars is not toppled. Remember, at the time I launched MyWikiBiz, about 30% of the Fortune 1000 firms were completely absent from Wikipedia. It seems a shame that the thought of $49 to $99 was viewed as an abhorrent barrier to their inclusion in the encyclopedia by an experienced, monitored business writer. Even today, some companies' articles -- even those in the Fortune 200 -- still look pretty clumsy. Someone being paid to just stylistically clean-up these articles would be an improvement to Wikipedia and not violate NPOV, no? Thing is, we never even got to have discussions like this, since block/ban/deny was the solution of the day.

Post 12: JzG

Yes, and all he did was advertise article writing services without clearing with Foundation first, try to make money out of the profile of Wikipedia built on millions of hours of volunteer effort and charitable donations, evade blocks and bans with sockpuppets, attack Jimbo, complain about the Foundation to the Florida state government, threaten to shop the Foundation to the IRS, offer to drop the threats if his editing privileges were restored, create articles on his paying clients using sockpuppets evading a ban, get an administrator to undelete them when they were deleted as speedy deletion category G5 (created by banned editor while banned), launch a 'conflict of interest' harassment meme against two longstanding contributors who were competing with him on the pundit circuit - it's really hard to see, when his offences are so trivial, why we haven't welcomed him back with open arms.

Not that I'm cynical or anything...

Post 13: Gregory (Thekohser)

They both defamed me before I had even noticed them, and telling the truth about that isn't 'harassment,' so... Lie.

I didn't know one needed to ask permission to taxi paying-fare customers to a public library that has a 'Ride Board' with money being paid for drivers?

Author Information

Author

Dtobias

Registered

01/04/08

Posts

108

Location

Boca Raton, FL, USA

Post 14

Title

Re: Jimmy Wales vs Kohs

Reference

Mike Halterman

Date

01/05/08

Time

10:01 AM

Jimbo has sent me personal replies to e-mails... Unfortunately, one of them said that I should go away and find a different hobby. (Too bad I'm not a good listener.)

---

Author Information

Author

JzG

Registered

01/01/08

Posts

72

Location

UK

Post 15

Title

Re: Jimmy Wales vs Kohs

Reference

Dtobias

Date

01/09/08

Time

01:03 AM

Jimbo has sent me personal replies to e-mails... Unfortunately, one of them said that I should go away and find a different hobby. (Too bad I'm not a good listener.)

Different from what? Beating dead horses? I'm right with him on that.

---

Author Information

Author

Mike Halterman

Registered

01/03/08

Posts

110

Location

Lutz, FL

Post 16

Title

Re: Jimmy Wales vs Kohs

Reference

JzG

Date

01/09/08

Time

01:48 AM

Come on now, why even go there? This kind of post does not add anything to the discussion except piss off people who read it. Thinking before typing is a virtue.

---

Author Information

Author

Swatjester

Registered

01/03/08

Posts

150

Post 17

Title

Re: Jimmy Wales vs Kohs

Reference

Mike Halterman

Date

01/09/08

Time

02:45 PM

Who cares? It's the cage match. At least we have an outlet to flame away and vent to keep it off-wiki.

---

Author Information

Author

Michael David

Registered

12/29/07

Posts

181

Location

USA

Post 18

Title

Re: Jimmy Wales vs Kohs

Reference

Swatjester

Date

01/09/08

Time

03:27 PM

Yeah, but so far it's been more like a playpen than a cage. I'm still waiting for someone with the guts to speak from theirs.