Since my catalytic effort of this past weekend (regarding a proxy post to Jimbo's Talk page) was fairly vigorously debated here on WR, it might be interesting to capture CURRENT thinking and reaction, in the hindsight of what we've seen in the past 48 hours.
I give you... a poll.
Full Version: Your reaction to the Wales/Sanger poking
I don't care much for polls, but I think it's a waste of Greg's valuable time to try and win any points on Jimbo's Game Board. I do understand the e-motive relief that one can get from lighting the occasional bag o' poop on his doorstep, but any more than that is time better spent Elsewhere! — as my old friend Coriol-Anus would say.
Ja Ja
Ja Ja
I thought it was just that Sanger finally countered Jimbo. How was this inspired by Kohs?
QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Thu 9th April 2009, 2:16pm) 
I thought it was just that Sanger finally countered Jimbo. How was this inspired by Kohs?
I'll let one of my colleagues at the Internet Review Corporation tell the back-story, if he wants. I'll ping him.
Placing the question was not trolling, IMO. Replacing it was... Having Mr Sanger writing purposely, clearly, and with real anger, is a sight to behold no matter my thoughts above.
QUOTE(LessHorrid vanU @ Thu 9th April 2009, 10:40pm)
Placing the question was not trolling, IMO. Replacing it was... Having Mr Sanger writing purposely, clearly, and with real anger, is a sight to behold no matter my thoughts above.
It's Jimbo who's been trolling for the past few years with his "sole founder" schtick.
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 9th April 2009, 6:34pm)
QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Thu 9th April 2009, 2:16pm)
I thought it was just that Sanger finally countered Jimbo. How was this inspired by Kohs?
I'll let one of my colleagues at the Internet Review Corporation tell the back-story, if he wants. I'll ping him.
I'm not sure it's much of a story. I stumbled across the message while searching for info on the history of Wikia Search (3Apes was one of the predecessors of Wikia Search), in light of its demise. I'm fairly sure I had read that post several times before it even occurred to me that Wales referred to himself as co-founder. I posted a message to my fellow Akahele co-founders, including Greg, which included a comment:
QUOTE
Heh, I just noticed something he said in that 2002 message: "I'm Jimmy Wales, co-founder of Nupedia and Wikipedia, the open content encyclopedias." Co-founder, eh?
Greg sent the link to Sanger, and Sanger went nuts as we've all witnessed.
For the record, after thinking about it for a while, I think it actually was a typo. As far as I can tell, Sanger wasn't co-founder of Nupedia, and yet Wales calls himself "co-founder of Nupedia and Wikipedia". That said, Wales has quite clearly been untruthful about other parts of the story. And while it's debatable whether Sanger should be called "co-founder", Wales' reference to himself as "sole founder" is just absurd.
Yeah, but — the New York Times article that Wales links to says:
"I can start an article that will consist of one paragraph, and then a real expert will come along and add three paragraphs and clean up my one paragraph," said Larry Sanger of Las Vegas, who founded Wikipedia with Mr. Wales. (He also works as the editor in chief of another online encyclopedia, Nupedia, which relies on a more traditional system of peer-review editing to assemble its contents.) "Then another expert will come along and change the whole thing to something that's even better and add in two new sections as well as a couple of new articles that sort of support the main article. It's constantly growing."
Peter Myers quoting Larry Sanger, 20 Sep 2001
Apparently, Wales "didn't have a problem with that" — or else why link to it with no qualification?
Jon Awbrey
QUOTE
"I can start an article that will consist of one paragraph, and then a real expert will come along and add three paragraphs and clean up my one paragraph," said Larry Sanger of Las Vegas, who founded Wikipedia with Mr. Wales. (He also works as the editor in chief of another online encyclopedia, Nupedia, which relies on a more traditional system of peer-review editing to assemble its contents.) "Then another expert will come along and change the whole thing to something that's even better and add in two new sections as well as a couple of new articles that sort of support the main article. It's constantly growing."
Peter Myers quoting Larry Sanger, 20 Sep 2001
Apparently, Wales "didn't have a problem with that" — or else why link to it with no qualification?
Jon Awbrey
Looks like about 30% to 40% had any level of disapproval of the initiation of this spectacle. Looks like a solid passing grade for me. I'm relieved.
Greg
Greg
By the way, I vote all of the above on question 1.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.