QUOTE(Kwork @ Wed 27th January 2010, 3:48pm)
I know next to nothing about Jimbo, but it seems quite likely that he is intelligent enough to understand that becoming a billionaire would do nothing to make his life better than it is now.
?!? -
strong oppose I suppose the philosophical amongst us, or even the comical, might ask, "would Jimbo's being a billionaire make
him a better person than he is now?". I am sure he'd trade in all the hassle tomorrow if he could
... and if it did not make him big easy money.One aspect you ought to remind yourself of is that although the encyclopedia might be "not-for-profit", Jimbo still trades himself off the back of its "success". So he still has a financial interest in it.
He whores himself out on the speakers circuit for big money and, last I read, he takes the full financial reward for himself.
On Paidcontent.org, Jimmy Wales is listed as "Above $75,000". On a par with Jay Leno and Deepak Chopra, apparently. No doubt, going out and inspiring corporations that they too could get their workers, and their workers' children, to work for fee ... as long as they host a bit of amateur hard core pornography on their corporate website.Elsewhere, it was $30,000 to $90,000 per event. Jimmy is represented by
The Harry Walker Agency ... and is still trading on the buzz of the now sunk Beasley-Wales Wikia search engine.
Into this particular hubris steps
Becky Betram of Covenant Technology Partners giving TheKohser a public dressing down for defending Dr Larry Sanger's role in the creation of the Wikipedia.
Wow ... don't fuck with a Sharepoint Becky ... but what she does point outs which interests me is that unusually ...
"due to contractual obligations" ... the Jimmy Wales lecture at her alma mater, Calvin College, will not be archived.
What gives ...? Is Jimmy against free culture distribution of his own big buck speeches? Afraid if others hear them they wont buy them ... or not wanting quoted on Wikipedia Review?
As Seth Finkelstein points out,
here, that he is paid more for one buzzword session that the Chief Technical Officer is paid for a whole years work.
Has this issue been raise again recent, or ever resolved ...?
Personally, it looks like creaming off the backs of unpaid workers to me. A modest wage as a PR officer and all the income going back into the not-for-profit org or one of its charities would surely be the ethical resolution.Now, that would make him a better person.