I found this discussion regarding the unresolved outcome of The Core Contest, a competition sponsored by Danny Wool to improve Wikipedia, with submissions by editors in November and December 2007. Martin Walker (User:Walkerma) has reviewed the submissions and chosen the best candidates, but no winner has been announced. This is absolutely not Mr. Walker's fault; rather, his dedication to motivate other editors to contribute high-quality content, and his fastidious review of their work, is deserving of commendation.
So who is to blame? Read and learn!
Full Version: The Core Contest
QUOTE(Shalom @ Thu 31st July 2008, 7:00pm) 
I found this discussion regarding the unresolved outcome of The Core Contest, a competition sponsored by Danny Wool to improve Wikipedia, with submissions by editors in November and December 2007. Martin Walker (User:Walkerma) has reviewed the submissions and chosen the best candidates, but no winner has been announced. This is absolutely not Mr. Walker's fault; rather, his dedication to motivate other editors to contribute high-quality content, and his fastidious review of their work, is deserving of commendation.
So who is to blame? Read and learn!
The same fuckwit who wrote this, sounds about right.
That was not the response I was looking for. I was hoping for an honest critique of someone making a promise and not keeping it.
QUOTE(Shalom @ Thu 31st July 2008, 8:57pm)
That was not the response I was looking for. I was hoping for an honest critique of someone making a promise and not keeping it.
From reading his blog, I've generally found Danny Wool intelligent and articulate, so I'm a little disappointed to see something that appears to reflect so badly on him. On the other hand, I have a tendency to occasionally bit off more than I can chew in life (or bite off an amount that I could chew, but which I don't owing to laziness and/or procrastination), so I have some sympathy with what he's done. Still, I think we can all agree that if things are as they appear, he needs to step in, make things right, and offer an apology. That's what I do on those frequent occasions when I let people down.
QUOTE(Shalom @ Thu 31st July 2008, 7:57pm)
That was not the response I was looking for. I was hoping for an honest critique of someone making a promise and not keeping it.
Sorry, you are right.
I think Danny should make a statement explaining himself. "I'm out of money..." or whatever. Walkerma should bug him privately to do this. Hopefully the contestants don't care about the money.
QUOTE(Pumpkin Muffins @ Thu 31st July 2008, 11:50pm)
Hopefully the contestants don't care about the money
One of the contestants wrote on the page I linked to:
QUOTE
Wow. I've just read this whole page. I would like to point out one thing that I did not see come up very often - poverty. Some people, like myself, are dedicated to improving wikipedia but also poor. I'll be honest - one of the reasons I am entering this contest is because I need the money. I suppose for most editors here $100 is peanuts, but it is not for me.
Anthere addressed this comment in her remarks below:
QUOTE
I noticed someone earlier in the above discussion said that he believed 100 dollars was likely to be a small amount for most participants of the contest, but it was not small to him. I think this is an issue which can not be left aside. 100 dollars is maybe not a lot for an american, but it is a lot in some countries. For some people, it will be a stipend, for others, it will be worth 6 months salary in their country. Can we neglect this point ?
I actually believe that in *this* case, we can neglect this point, because the total envelop of the compensation is limited (500 dollars). However, would it be the same if the total envelop proposed was 1 000 000 dollars ? Which would mean 10 000 payments ? Small scale seems fine, but will it still be fine at large scale ? What would be the impact ?
To clarify, the poster of the first quote (whom I won't name in order not to cause embarrassment) is a female American.
Wow.
This looks really, really, really bad for Danny Wool and Veropedia. Apparently, they offered $500 to Wikipediots who would improve articles, which were then scraped to Veropedia. Then, they failed (for MONTHS!) to pay out one cent of the $500. I understand Danny's broke, but come on...
Even when Centiare offered a $200 prize for the best new page developed, when there was only ONE ENTRANT who bothered to participate, I still made damn sure to pay him -- even at his mild protest.
This is alarmingly bad commercial ethics.
Which reminds me... I have to finish proofreading and formatting the Senatorial Project.
This looks really, really, really bad for Danny Wool and Veropedia. Apparently, they offered $500 to Wikipediots who would improve articles, which were then scraped to Veropedia. Then, they failed (for MONTHS!) to pay out one cent of the $500. I understand Danny's broke, but come on...
Even when Centiare offered a $200 prize for the best new page developed, when there was only ONE ENTRANT who bothered to participate, I still made damn sure to pay him -- even at his mild protest.
This is alarmingly bad commercial ethics.
QUOTE
Who won?
I don't recall seeing who the winner was. Any update? AgneCheese/Wine 05:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
We still haven't picked the winner. I'm one of the judges, and so you can at least partly blame me, but it's been many hours of work to check hundreds of diffs. Having said that, I've been blown away by the amount of quality work that's been done, so it's been one of the most pleasurable tasks I've ever had on Wikipedia. This has really had a big impact on many important articles. I'm pretty much finished now reviewing, and hopefully we can get the process moved forward. Watch this space! Walkerma (talk) 05:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
So, who won?Randomblue (talk) 20:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Common sense, I think.--Matt Lewis (talk) 20:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
We have a shortlist of around 15, and we're now picking the best five from that right now. Some of the entries are spectacular! Walkerma (talk) 21:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh stop flattering me
Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 00:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
So, who won?Earthdirt (talk) 17:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Who cares. -- Taku (talk) 22:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I've got my top five, and I've contacted Danny again, but I haven't heard back yet. Walkerma (talk) 03:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Have you heard about him yet? The whole thing is quite unfair for those who participated if the proposers doesn't actually follow the proposal. Randomblue (talk) 16:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
It's a joke at this point. In the future, don't run contests unless you set a timeline for judging and stick to it.--Father Goose (talk) 00:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
It may have just been an advertisement for Veropedia [3], said I, apparently lacking enough good faith. –Outriggr § 01:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
And Danny has the nerve to blog about the ethics of other people??? WAS 4.250 (talk) 19:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
In case you didn't know, this was a scum. -- Taku (talk) 00:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Interesting choice of words. It does seem strange that ALL the entered articles got transfered to Veropedia very quickly, and yet half a year later no winners have been named in the "coming days" of this contest. I believe publicly promoting a contest (which benefits the promoter no less) and then not following through would probably qualify as a breech of contract in every State in the US. (Please note the complete lack of legal threat here, it is just a statement of fact to illustrate the preceding scum and ethic comments relating the to promoter and sponsor of this contest). Earthdirt (talk) 01:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I've had nothing to do with this. I'm willing to bring this to someone's attention. What is the next step? Anyone? WAS 4.250 (talk) 04:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I was asked to be a judge in the competition, which I did in good faith (I spent 15-20 hours doing so). I also still believe that the competition was set up in good faith, with every intention of following through. I am extremely disappointed that the results & prizes never materialized, and I plan to email all of the main entrants (when I get some time) to thank them for their work, which has benefited WP immensely - it's the only thing that I personally can do. Walkerma (talk) 05:16, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Please provide everyone with your best information on who owes who what. Did Danny promise lots of money and then not deliver? WAS 4.250 (talk) 05:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Who frankly cares? If you are editing Wikipedia to make money, you are in the wrong business, my friend. THAT lesson should have been learned long ago. I did participate by editing Wildlife of Brazil, but I knew that I probably wouldn't win, yet I edited anyway. Why? Because it helped Wikipedia. That was the goal here. If it also helped Veropedia, then so be it. No thanks should be necessary. I guess I feel kind of bad for those people that would have "won" the prize, but they should have known that there was no guarantee, and Danny doesn't have to pay anyone anything. Does it hurt Danny's credibility, perhaps. But just be happy that the magnanimous editings of articles for made benefit glorious encyclopedia of Wikipedia. Mahalo. --Ali'i 13:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I made my choices for the top 15 by early January, but I have never heard about anyone else's choices. The original offer was five prizes of $100, from Danny's own bank account. The competition was held with the best of intentions at a time of great hope (note the final sentence), but things haven't worked out as planned, and so there IS no money at this point. Dredging things up now would be pointless, and counter-productive to WP. Let's try to learn a lesson, but let's also move on, and focus on making WP better. Walkerma (talk) 14:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Unless Danny has actually declared bankruptcy, he has to pay. He's still actively working on Veropedia, so there must be enough money to keep paying for hosting. It's absolutely appalling that someone would offer $500, take the work produced and then not pay up. I'm no lawyer, but I suspect anyone that cared strongly enough (which is probably no-one, since it's only $100) could sue for breach of contract. --Tango (talk) 15:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments made by the entrants around the start suggested there were very few who took part in the competition for the money. Personally, in the unlikely event of me winning, I would have passed the money on to the WMF. I was in it for the glory and the chicks. However, neither of these materialised either. The main disappointment was not knowing how the entries fared. My entry doesn't even seem to have been uploaded to Veropedia, so I guess I wasn't a front runner, but I would be interested to know how my driving was. — BillC talk 18:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I didn't realise Danny was offering chicks, but I wouldn't put it past him! I think they are in a catch22 situation. If he pays up he opens a can of worms, if doesn't he looks like a worm. It's not the initial money - if he put $10 a week in his piggybank he's have paid for it by now! But legal fees though?
I do wonder about the 'great' quality too - surely it would have just brought out more of the same? No offense to anyone here - there are a great many decent editors on Wikipedia who do sterling work, but people don't suddenly become Shakespeare when you offer them a hundred bucks. It's not all that easy to make long edits on Wikipedia either. Collaboration kind of messes with the prose - it's a choppy thing, Wikipedia. Can they give the award to edits that have since been changed? What does that say about Wikipedia? What does any of it say about Wikipedia? My bet is that they just wish the whole thing will quietly slip away. --Matt Lewis (talk) 19:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
It is unethical and illegal to extract work with promises of money and then not pay. A lack of concern for ethics is damaging Wikipedia. An effort to create a learning resource at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Ethical_Man...guage_Wikipedia is an attempt to do something about this. WAS 4.250 (talk) 21:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes. I interpret Walkerma's 14:33 message as saying that the 'prize money' was contingent on the business success of Veropedia, which confirms that this contest was an advertisement. I understand that at least one person has been banned on Wikipedia for ethical (disclosed) behavior relating to taking money to write NPOV articles about companies. Yet this unethical behavior is apparently going to have no consequence for anyone. I encourage someone (who likes to get involved in wiki politics more than I) to submit this situation to the news section or somewhere that will increase awareness and help to prevent it happening again. –Outriggr § 02:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Yo Danny
Appalling is the right word. The money promised was a modest sum, so I sincerely doubt it would break Danny financially to live up to his promise.
Danny, be a mensch. Say a mea culpa, turn the judging over to Walkerma so that it'll actually go forward, and beg, borrow, or earn the $500, if you don't have it already. Don't insult the people who participated in the contest any more than they already have been. The amount of face this has cost you is worth a lot more than 500 bucks. Stem your losses by acting rightfully, even if you're a few months late. If you want to claim any kind of moral superiority over Jimbo or anyone else, or criticize anyone about "fiduciary responsibility", act morally and responsibly yourself, right now.--Father Goose (talk) 05:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:M...Sense_of_Ethics
http://allswool.blogspot.com/2008/06/does-...to-survive.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dan...he_Core_Contest
WAS 4.250 (talk) 14:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't recall seeing who the winner was. Any update? AgneCheese/Wine 05:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
We still haven't picked the winner. I'm one of the judges, and so you can at least partly blame me, but it's been many hours of work to check hundreds of diffs. Having said that, I've been blown away by the amount of quality work that's been done, so it's been one of the most pleasurable tasks I've ever had on Wikipedia. This has really had a big impact on many important articles. I'm pretty much finished now reviewing, and hopefully we can get the process moved forward. Watch this space! Walkerma (talk) 05:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
So, who won?Randomblue (talk) 20:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Common sense, I think.--Matt Lewis (talk) 20:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
We have a shortlist of around 15, and we're now picking the best five from that right now. Some of the entries are spectacular! Walkerma (talk) 21:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh stop flattering me
Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 00:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC) So, who won?Earthdirt (talk) 17:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Who cares. -- Taku (talk) 22:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I've got my top five, and I've contacted Danny again, but I haven't heard back yet. Walkerma (talk) 03:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Have you heard about him yet? The whole thing is quite unfair for those who participated if the proposers doesn't actually follow the proposal. Randomblue (talk) 16:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
It's a joke at this point. In the future, don't run contests unless you set a timeline for judging and stick to it.--Father Goose (talk) 00:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
It may have just been an advertisement for Veropedia [3], said I, apparently lacking enough good faith. –Outriggr § 01:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
And Danny has the nerve to blog about the ethics of other people??? WAS 4.250 (talk) 19:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
In case you didn't know, this was a scum. -- Taku (talk) 00:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Interesting choice of words. It does seem strange that ALL the entered articles got transfered to Veropedia very quickly, and yet half a year later no winners have been named in the "coming days" of this contest. I believe publicly promoting a contest (which benefits the promoter no less) and then not following through would probably qualify as a breech of contract in every State in the US. (Please note the complete lack of legal threat here, it is just a statement of fact to illustrate the preceding scum and ethic comments relating the to promoter and sponsor of this contest). Earthdirt (talk) 01:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I've had nothing to do with this. I'm willing to bring this to someone's attention. What is the next step? Anyone? WAS 4.250 (talk) 04:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I was asked to be a judge in the competition, which I did in good faith (I spent 15-20 hours doing so). I also still believe that the competition was set up in good faith, with every intention of following through. I am extremely disappointed that the results & prizes never materialized, and I plan to email all of the main entrants (when I get some time) to thank them for their work, which has benefited WP immensely - it's the only thing that I personally can do. Walkerma (talk) 05:16, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Please provide everyone with your best information on who owes who what. Did Danny promise lots of money and then not deliver? WAS 4.250 (talk) 05:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Who frankly cares? If you are editing Wikipedia to make money, you are in the wrong business, my friend. THAT lesson should have been learned long ago. I did participate by editing Wildlife of Brazil, but I knew that I probably wouldn't win, yet I edited anyway. Why? Because it helped Wikipedia. That was the goal here. If it also helped Veropedia, then so be it. No thanks should be necessary. I guess I feel kind of bad for those people that would have "won" the prize, but they should have known that there was no guarantee, and Danny doesn't have to pay anyone anything. Does it hurt Danny's credibility, perhaps. But just be happy that the magnanimous editings of articles for made benefit glorious encyclopedia of Wikipedia. Mahalo. --Ali'i 13:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I made my choices for the top 15 by early January, but I have never heard about anyone else's choices. The original offer was five prizes of $100, from Danny's own bank account. The competition was held with the best of intentions at a time of great hope (note the final sentence), but things haven't worked out as planned, and so there IS no money at this point. Dredging things up now would be pointless, and counter-productive to WP. Let's try to learn a lesson, but let's also move on, and focus on making WP better. Walkerma (talk) 14:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Unless Danny has actually declared bankruptcy, he has to pay. He's still actively working on Veropedia, so there must be enough money to keep paying for hosting. It's absolutely appalling that someone would offer $500, take the work produced and then not pay up. I'm no lawyer, but I suspect anyone that cared strongly enough (which is probably no-one, since it's only $100) could sue for breach of contract. --Tango (talk) 15:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments made by the entrants around the start suggested there were very few who took part in the competition for the money. Personally, in the unlikely event of me winning, I would have passed the money on to the WMF. I was in it for the glory and the chicks. However, neither of these materialised either. The main disappointment was not knowing how the entries fared. My entry doesn't even seem to have been uploaded to Veropedia, so I guess I wasn't a front runner, but I would be interested to know how my driving was. — BillC talk 18:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I didn't realise Danny was offering chicks, but I wouldn't put it past him! I think they are in a catch22 situation. If he pays up he opens a can of worms, if doesn't he looks like a worm. It's not the initial money - if he put $10 a week in his piggybank he's have paid for it by now! But legal fees though?
I do wonder about the 'great' quality too - surely it would have just brought out more of the same? No offense to anyone here - there are a great many decent editors on Wikipedia who do sterling work, but people don't suddenly become Shakespeare when you offer them a hundred bucks. It's not all that easy to make long edits on Wikipedia either. Collaboration kind of messes with the prose - it's a choppy thing, Wikipedia. Can they give the award to edits that have since been changed? What does that say about Wikipedia? What does any of it say about Wikipedia? My bet is that they just wish the whole thing will quietly slip away. --Matt Lewis (talk) 19:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
It is unethical and illegal to extract work with promises of money and then not pay. A lack of concern for ethics is damaging Wikipedia. An effort to create a learning resource at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Ethical_Man...guage_Wikipedia is an attempt to do something about this. WAS 4.250 (talk) 21:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes. I interpret Walkerma's 14:33 message as saying that the 'prize money' was contingent on the business success of Veropedia, which confirms that this contest was an advertisement. I understand that at least one person has been banned on Wikipedia for ethical (disclosed) behavior relating to taking money to write NPOV articles about companies. Yet this unethical behavior is apparently going to have no consequence for anyone. I encourage someone (who likes to get involved in wiki politics more than I) to submit this situation to the news section or somewhere that will increase awareness and help to prevent it happening again. –Outriggr § 02:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Yo Danny
Appalling is the right word. The money promised was a modest sum, so I sincerely doubt it would break Danny financially to live up to his promise.
Danny, be a mensch. Say a mea culpa, turn the judging over to Walkerma so that it'll actually go forward, and beg, borrow, or earn the $500, if you don't have it already. Don't insult the people who participated in the contest any more than they already have been. The amount of face this has cost you is worth a lot more than 500 bucks. Stem your losses by acting rightfully, even if you're a few months late. If you want to claim any kind of moral superiority over Jimbo or anyone else, or criticize anyone about "fiduciary responsibility", act morally and responsibly yourself, right now.--Father Goose (talk) 05:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:M...Sense_of_Ethics
http://allswool.blogspot.com/2008/06/does-...to-survive.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dan...he_Core_Contest
WAS 4.250 (talk) 14:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Which reminds me... I have to finish proofreading and formatting the Senatorial Project.
The whole thing is a joke. Both the fact Danny promised a cash prize, and the fact people are writing for money and not for the enjoyment of it. That's not what Wikipedia is for. It's an abuse of the site.
QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 2nd August 2008, 8:32am)
Wow.
This looks really, really, really bad for Danny Wool and Veropedia. Apparently, they offered $500 to Wikipediots who would improve articles, which were then scraped to Veropedia. Then, they failed (for MONTHS!) to pay out one cent of the $500. I understand Danny's broke, but come on...
He is? he always seems to be bragging about his international film making projects that he's so proud of, and apologizing for being out of touch because he's on a plane somewhere. I dunno, maybe he's broke, but I wouldn't assume it. I suppose he could be full of hatred for wikipedia right now and holding out to exact whatever seething revenge he can, but does that really sound like the soft and cuddly teddy bear we all know and love?
I think I should probably answer this to clarify my position. I will not go into all the details, but actually, my current financial situation is not as great as I would like it to be. I've been going through a difficult slump, and only now am I beginning to bounce back. In other words, yes, I have my freelance work, and coupled with help from family and friends, I have been able to keep my head above water--but just barely. After several long, unanticipated delays, I am hoping that things are starting to pick up.
So let me be perfectly clear. I feel horrible about the unanticipated delay in paying the contest prizes. I have every intent of paying them when I can, in other words, when I have managed to pay the basic expenses of rent, utilities, etc. I did not anticipate these problems, but it would be silly to make excuses for them. Instead, I can only try to convey how badly I feel about it. I offer my sincere apologies, and assure you that in my list of payments, this is and has been a top priority.
As Florence said, "For some people $100 is a significant amount of money." Unfortunately, for the past several months, I have been one of them. I just ask for patience and understanding as I begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
So let me be perfectly clear. I feel horrible about the unanticipated delay in paying the contest prizes. I have every intent of paying them when I can, in other words, when I have managed to pay the basic expenses of rent, utilities, etc. I did not anticipate these problems, but it would be silly to make excuses for them. Instead, I can only try to convey how badly I feel about it. I offer my sincere apologies, and assure you that in my list of payments, this is and has been a top priority.
As Florence said, "For some people $100 is a significant amount of money." Unfortunately, for the past several months, I have been one of them. I just ask for patience and understanding as I begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
QUOTE(Danny @ Sat 2nd August 2008, 8:29pm)
I think I should probably answer this to clarify my position. I will not go into all the details, but actually, my current financial situation is not as great as I would like it to be. I've been going through a difficult slump, and only now am I beginning to bounce back. In other words, yes, I have my freelance work, and coupled with help from family and friends, I have been able to keep my head above water--but just barely. After several long, unanticipated delays, I am hoping that things are starting to pick up.
So let me be perfectly clear. I feel horrible about the unanticipated delay in paying the contest prizes. I have every intent of paying them when I can, in other words, when I have managed to pay the basic expenses of rent, utilities, etc. I did not anticipate these problems, but it would be silly to make excuses for them. Instead, I can only try to convey how badly I feel about it. I offer my sincere apologies, and assure you that in my list of payments, this is and has been a top priority.
As Florence said, "For some people $100 is a significant amount of money." Unfortunately, for the past several months, I have been one of them. I just ask for patience and understanding as I begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
Well, that's a reasonable explanation. We've all been there.
Case closed.
NEXT!!
QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Sat 2nd August 2008, 9:54pm)
QUOTE(Danny @ Sat 2nd August 2008, 8:29pm)
I think I should probably answer this to clarify my position. I will not go into all the details, but actually, my current financial situation is not as great as I would like it to be. I've been going through a difficult slump, and only now am I beginning to bounce back. In other words, yes, I have my freelance work, and coupled with help from family and friends, I have been able to keep my head above water--but just barely. After several long, unanticipated delays, I am hoping that things are starting to pick up.
So let me be perfectly clear. I feel horrible about the unanticipated delay in paying the contest prizes. I have every intent of paying them when I can, in other words, when I have managed to pay the basic expenses of rent, utilities, etc. I did not anticipate these problems, but it would be silly to make excuses for them. Instead, I can only try to convey how badly I feel about it. I offer my sincere apologies, and assure you that in my list of payments, this is and has been a top priority.
As Florence said, "For some people $100 is a significant amount of money." Unfortunately, for the past several months, I have been one of them. I just ask for patience and understanding as I begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
Well, that's a reasonable explanation. We've all been there.
Case closed.
NEXT!!
Indeed, thanks for the explanation.
QUOTE(Danny @ Sat 2nd August 2008, 8:29pm)
I think I should probably answer this to clarify my position. I will not go into all the details, but actually, my current financial situation is not as great as I would like it to be. I've been going through a difficult slump, and only now am I beginning to bounce back. In other words, yes, I have my freelance work, and coupled with help from family and friends, I have been able to keep my head above water--but just barely. After several long, unanticipated delays, I am hoping that things are starting to pick up.
So let me be perfectly clear. I feel horrible about the unanticipated delay in paying the contest prizes. I have every intent of paying them when I can, in other words, when I have managed to pay the basic expenses of rent, utilities, etc. I did not anticipate these problems, but it would be silly to make excuses for them. Instead, I can only try to convey how badly I feel about it. I offer my sincere apologies, and assure you that in my list of payments, this is and has been a top priority.
As Florence said, "For some people $100 is a significant amount of money." Unfortunately, for the past several months, I have been one of them. I just ask for patience and understanding as I begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
Might be good to say that on-wiki ... you know how some people are about linking to WR. Even when the info's good.
QUOTE(Lar @ Sat 2nd August 2008, 6:34pm)
QUOTE(Danny @ Sat 2nd August 2008, 8:29pm)
I think I should probably answer this to clarify my position. I will not go into all the details, but actually, my current financial situation is not as great as I would like it to be. I've been going through a difficult slump, and only now am I beginning to bounce back. In other words, yes, I have my freelance work, and coupled with help from family and friends, I have been able to keep my head above water--but just barely. After several long, unanticipated delays, I am hoping that things are starting to pick up.
So let me be perfectly clear. I feel horrible about the unanticipated delay in paying the contest prizes. I have every intent of paying them when I can, in other words, when I have managed to pay the basic expenses of rent, utilities, etc. I did not anticipate these problems, but it would be silly to make excuses for them. Instead, I can only try to convey how badly I feel about it. I offer my sincere apologies, and assure you that in my list of payments, this is and has been a top priority.
As Florence said, "For some people $100 is a significant amount of money." Unfortunately, for the past several months, I have been one of them. I just ask for patience and understanding as I begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
Might be good to say that on-wiki ... you know how some people are about linking to WR. Even when the info's good.
To Danny:
I'll second Lar's advice to post this on wiki. I understand also what it's like to have difficulty coming up with a few hundred bucks.
It might not be a bad idea to announce the winners on wiki, inform them that you hope to pay them by (let's say) December 31, 2008, and ask them to email you how they wish to be paid. I think it would help move the process forward and solidify your commitment to follow through on making up for lost time.
I think it was great that you had the courage to stand up and respond to this issue directly.
I'm awfully tempted to offer up the $500 myself to the winners, and then Danny can just pay me back whenever he has the money available to him.
Perhaps that would be an effective gesture to demonstrate to Wikipediots that I'm not the vulture I've been described as.
Danny, would you want to accept those terms, or does it just complicate matters?
Perhaps that would be an effective gesture to demonstrate to Wikipediots that I'm not the vulture I've been described as.
Danny, would you want to accept those terms, or does it just complicate matters?
While I am very touched by this, it has to come from me. I made the promise, and I have to keep it. I can only add that I am working very hard right now, and hopefully it will pay off. I will take the advice and announce this on the wiki tomorrow.
I'm awfully tempted to offer up the $500 myself to the winners, and then Danny can just pay me back whenever he has the money available to him.
Perhaps that would be an effective gesture to demonstrate to Wikipediots that I'm not the vulture I've been described as.
Danny, would you want to accept those terms, or does it just complicate matters?
QUOTE(thekohser @ Sun 3rd August 2008, 2:53am)
I'm awfully tempted to offer up the $500 myself to the winners, and then Danny can just pay me back whenever he has the money available to him.
Perhaps that would be an effective gesture to demonstrate to Wikipediots that I'm not the vulture I've been described as.
Danny, would you want to accept those terms, or does it just complicate matters?
Wow. this is really, really embarrassing.
I just became wise to this when I noticed that the final edit of (arguably) my favorite Wikipedian in the universe, the normally imperturbable and now retired Outriggr, was to condemn this fraudulent contest.
Pay up!
I just became wise to this when I noticed that the final edit of (arguably) my favorite Wikipedian in the universe, the normally imperturbable and now retired Outriggr, was to condemn this fraudulent contest.
Pay up!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.