Jimmy is assuming bad faith with his "hostile and paranoid" personal attack.

One of the first rules of lobbying is that you don't announce your groups position or that you are lobbying. Otherwise, you make it easier for opponents to know how you are moving and to spend funds to counter it. Even if Jimbo wanted to get something moving on this issue, he basically shot himself in the foot right at the beginning.

I have a feeling that most of Jimbo's supporters are under aged or not US citizens, so it doesn't really matter what their opinion is. Do you see the ACLU pandering on message boards? Instead, they have a strategic media blitz, have set lobby meals/events, have been involved consistently, etc. I disagree with the ACLU quite often but they are at least a model of how people are involved in the system. Even their write-in campaigns are very small, strategic, and deal with a specific issue or small aspect of a bill.

Here's one example of that. Jimbo edits Manuka Honey to flag it that is needs basic copyediting. But has never edited the article, and instead of taking the time to make even small improvement, flags it for others to do so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=465265847

Quite, but I would also colour in "AFAIK" (Sue) and "I am in constant communication with Sue" (Jimmy). Delicious.

That ain't his first visit to that article to spray paint it.

He seems to have a known history of intolerance of the notion that certain natural foods can have antibiotic properties.

Maybe an ex of his is selling the Manuka honey out of her home, so he's just doing his part to make her means of income more difficult.

I doubt Jimbo will have any trouble getting this covered by the press, even if no "strike" takes place. As with the Italian law, that could be enough to scupper it. Lobbying in this case probably means getting Jimbo invited to speak before some panel of politicians. I imagine a phone call to the EFF could probably have accomplished the same thing, but what do I know?

Indeed, as well as "our" lawyer, maybe... is the lawyer in question still in any real sense his lawyer? Is Jimmy becoming the nerd-hanging-on?

not his 1st visit, his other was to likewise tag but not improve the article, to complain about a friend using it for cancer treatment for their kid or something. So all that gnashing of teeth to passive aggressively try to get other editors to fix his gripe. It's a small non-controversial article (at least it is now). Of all the articles with promotional campaigns going on within them, this rates a 2 on a 1 to 10 scale.

It's not Mzoli's Meats, for sure.

Maybe he wants Cla68 to kiss his ring and get busy editing it for him. Jimmy does carry grudges from years ago, this much is clear. Also that he doesn't seem very intelligent. Anyone know his IQ?

Professional lobbyists are a waste of money. They're just in it for the paycheck. Better to have Jimmy Wales and some Wikipedians go to Washington, and present their case with all sincerity. They can learn what they need along the way, using the internet if need be.

Yes of course, because it is well established that sincerity trumps money and connections in Washington.

This brings up a point I think often overlooked by the WP Elite in their disdain for "IP editors"....IP editors are actually more trustworthy stewards of the WP community..."you know where they live" so to speak....the rest of us Anonymous kooky name alias editors get to hide who we are and where we are editing from (like what company or government agency). Some anonymous editors even use more than one alias.

IP editors meanwhile are easily traceable by all WP editors. You can "geolocate" if someone is a corporate or government "lobbyist" without having to be a part of the Wiki Police. No favors required.

WP should allow editing only with a verified "real name" or otherwise post IP addresses next to each edit/alias.

But I guess that would take the fun out of what appears to be WP's #1 goal, to be a social media game.

Wikify Washington?

Meanwhile the news leaks out onto the internet. http://torrentfreak.com/wikipedia-mulls-to...se-sopa-111212/

"Yeah let's do it man!"
"Awesome"
"Censorship sucks"
"Wikipedia sucks but let's do anyway man!"

Interesting:



22 edits, created May 2007 by a throwaway account.

Come off it Greg! You of all people know that there are loads of notable firms with no WP article, or at least they wouldn't if you hadn't created the articles!

Dow Lohnes seems to be a long-established (founded 1918) and substantial firm, at least as lawyers. Maybe they're not significant as lobbyists, though.

Say, while I'm writing this - why don't you explain to them they need a WP article to improve their credibility, especially if they intend to act for WMF. I'm sure they'll want you to write it.

With Jimbo's bashing of Bell Pottinger still fresh in our memories, this is hilarious.

It doesn't work that way. Scheduling alone and knowing where and when to get to is quite a lot to learn. Then you have to learn the key people who can get different language changed, the staff members to get items to someone's attention, etc.

A good equivalent is saying that if you are in a court that you can pick up how to defend yourself. Sure, you could. But you wont know about various precedence, have the research, etc. These are professionals that assist you in getting all of the stuff you need because there are a lot of people and a lot of agencies.

Better to ask a question like that in a direct manner. I didn't use a hostile tone, Jimbo responded the way he did because I have been giving him a hard time lately. Anyway, I just asked Ms Gardner for more information.

Now there is fuckwittery of the Godwin kind.

See here in partuicular "How Different are the Definitions?" and "More US Control over the Internet?":
http://www.copyhype.com/2011/12/open-act-s...ening-thoughts/

New Register article.

Jimbo's acting as CEO of Wikipedia

You ain't just whistlin Dixie... check out the newsfeed today.

And, as usual, Seth Finkelstein is brilliant in how he calmly points out how foolish is the Wikimedia Foundation management.

That probably accounts for the recent uptick in the particularly dimwitted "support" rationales.

I wonder whether Jimbo will take all this media attention to mean that the poll results have become tainted. I see that there are plenty of anons and new, throwaway accounts voting in the poll. Most of these anons and new accounts are responsible for the mountain of "Firmly Support" votes at the top of the poll.

Jimmy is still unhapy about Cla

What track record jimmy has in mind, this one?

Cla68 does not profit off of Wikipedia, yet contributes 10,000% more to it than Jimbo. Jimbo profits from his "founder" status on Wikipedia.

Why is Jimmy so hostile to Chuck Ainsworth?

Because Chuck is in the right.

Just to illustrate the average quality of the "support votes":

*'''Strongest Possible Support''' The threat that SOPA presents can not be understated.

which even allowing for hyperbole is not what I think the user meant. Unless, again, someone's being sarcastic - I make these kinds of comments when I'm trying to be funny - but I think I have lost the ability to distinguish.

And Cla, judging by the comments, their intelligence might indeed be low enough.

Ms Gardner has been more patient and forthcoming with her answers to my inquiries, but I'm waiting for her to answer my latest follow-up questions. I think she can probably come up with an adequate answer as to how and why the WMF retained a paid lobbyist without any of us knowing about it until now, but I suspect that she might struggle to answer the question of why it's ok for Jimbo to pretend to be nothing more than a WP community member while at the same time acting on behalf of the WMF as self-elected spokesman and a member of the executive board.

I like your Wikipedia User page, Cookie:



They haven't banned you yet? Just *who* are you?!

They're going to start thinking you're me!

Personally I like the first entry on the talk page, though it's probably more applicable to Commons: WP:YOURDOODLESUCKS

Nope, never socked. I'm a serial editor not a parallel.

To be fair, they haven't banned Cla either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=465731500

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=465732437

The polling has ended. I feel that Wikipedia is most likely going on strike.

The Jimbo-worship lemming behavior wears thin after a few days. OTOH I'm completely surprised that they'd let me of all people nail the coffin. I guess we need more readers.

Eh, you're part of the system. Everyone knows it.

This.

User accounts on Wikipedia are onerous collars of discipline that are meant to subject the human being who knows the password to the account to arcane and arbitrary rules. If you follow the rules and pay enough lip-service, the "community" will come to "like" you. Alternatively, if you point out that the emperor has no clothes, if you broadcast how shaky their infrastructure is, or if you ignore their arbitrary rules, the "community" will come to "dislike" you. As a person. The person behind the user account.

The freak show that is WR comes in part from the fact that many of the ex-contributors here were hoodwinked into thinking that user accounts were an attractive feature of the website. They are, rather, the means to Party Membership into their 1984-like cult. And WR is Emmanuel Goldstein.

Funny thing is, III is correct. Plus: Jimbo posted about the strike on the admin noticeboard
on Saturday, and it was roundly ignored. I suspect that, even with a favorable vote, this will go nowhere.

It is a wargame and a drug, and No One Is Permitted To Take Away Their Drug. If anyone at the WMF
actually does work up the nerve to shut down the servers, even for a few hours, the resulting
shitrain will be massive. The person who did the deed will be offered up for ritual slaughter.

Cowards......all of them, snivelling cowards.....

It should have been proposed by someone with a little bit of je ne se qua - Jimbo just doesn't have it.

Godwin's replacement speaks:

http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/12/13/how-s...-and-wikipedia/

Basically SOPA won't affect them at all, they are shilling for Google.

Wowah! The WMF finally got a real lawyer. Geoff is one smart cookie.

Bullshit. Commons contains thousands of images snatched from Flickr, Photobucket, and Picasa,
usually taken with no attempt to verify ownership or permissions. I even know which admins
are doing this, and have been doing this for years.

If Geoff really was so smart, he wouldn't work for Jimbo's Folly.

Made Slashdot today. Plus the "visual editor".

SOPA seems to be targeted at link farms to torrents, and counterfeit goods site. I'll be surprised if WP has a huge number of outward links to such sites, but if they do then reap the whirlwind.

You are forgetting that the main teeth deal with 1. foreign websites and 2. ad revenue. Wikipedia has neither. Now, if the Germans managed to get their own local servers, then the law may affect them and their porny ways.

Geoff says:


Hey, dipwad... what do you think the WikiNazis are doing on a daily basis with the "Spam Blacklist", where they censor sites that aren't even spamming?

Oh, I see someone already made that point in the blog comments:

I think we should tell Congress to stop online piracy.

Thanks for that, I'm finding it hard to get the other side of this story. This one is also interesting

http://vimeo.com/32592166

particularly some of the moronic comments (corporates are so obviously evil, aren't they).

Lacking hard evidence, I had scrapped the section of my UKCC letter about Wikipedia being a monopoly and a lobbying organisation. I am thinking about putting it back.

We sell design and manufacturing software across the world, a lot of US companies use the software to make the products and parts that everyone here will use everyday. We have a number of company forums that support customers. Daily we get an influx of spam messages posted onto the forums with links to websites advertising counterfeit goods of our customers. Messages advertising send us a genuine part and we'll give you a price on making N copies.

Design and manufacturing companies lose billions each year.