Unsubstantiated claims of Wikimedia corruption: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:24, 18 June 2004

Evidence of Wikimedia corruption includes:

no actual end user (as opposed to "developer" or "sysop" or "editor") rep on the "board"
"Wikimedia Foundation" not consulted when legally important decisions made, e.g. in response to Wikipedia being blocked in China, which is the biggest issue it has ever faced, the GodKing unilaterally "hereby authorize Andrew Lih to make a statement on our behalf, based on usual happy NPOV talk." This was less than one day after the "election" of Wikimedia Board of Trustees who evidently had no opinion that mattered, on this all-important question.
false claims added to Wikimedia article here, and true claims removed
technological escalation against Recyclopedia and threatened against Wikinfo
users not consulted when user environment changes
libel chill by Wales
solicitation of donations beyond Florida state lines
withholding of information regarding link transit at Wikipedia which would be very useful to editors, but also quite profitable for a search engine like Bomis
outing and concomitant libel based on echo chamber claims
sysop vandalism most notably by Auntie Angela
sysop vigilantiism and more serious developer vigilantiism, notably by Tim Starling and Erik Moeller
ad hominem delete without process, recently spread to Meta-Wikipedia
ad hominem revert allowed to stand, including clearly racist ones, e.g. on Islam articles by Zionists, pointing to articles primarily written BY Zionists
U.S. and U.K. centric editorial policy, set by people who speak only English

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Evidence of '''Wikimedia corruption''' includes:
-*withholding full [[Wikimedia Board of Trustees]] election results from the voters!  [http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2004-June/000360.html apparently there will be NO release of figures (!), even on a sitewide basis, according to directives by Jimbo] the [[GodKing]] of Wikimedia and [[Bomis]]
-*no [[independent board]] free of influence from [[Bomis.com]] - although [http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2004-June/000371.html "two of the current trustees don't seem to be active Wikimedians"], those being [[sock puppet]] votes of [[Jimbo Wales]]:  his employees at that corporation.
 *no actual end user (as opposed to "developer" or "sysop" or "editor") rep on the "board"
 *"Wikimedia Foundation" not consulted when legally important decisions made, e.g. [http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2004-June/000384.html in response to Wikipedia being blocked in China], which is the biggest issue it has ever faced, the [[GodKing]] unilaterally "hereby authorize Andrew Lih to make a statement on our behalf, based on [[usual happy NPOV talk]]."  This was less than one day after the "election" of [[Wikimedia Board of Trustees]] who evidently had no opinion that mattered, on this all-important question.