Jimmy Wales Faces Allegations of Corruption
eldavojohn writes "The SFGate site has up an article noting that Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, is facing allegations from multiple quarters accusing him of abusing his power. Several people apparently claim he used the foundation to pay for personal expenses, including reimbursement for a $1,300 dinner for four at a Florida steakhouse. Accusations have also been made indicating that he edited the Wikipedia entry of political commentator Rachel Marsden, a woman he was seeing, at her request. In the case of that allegation, Wales replied that 'I acted completely consistently with Wikipedia policy. I did the right thing: I passed along my work to date for other editors to deal with, and I recused myself from the case.'"
That, and the fact that the Wikipedia elite seem to be so inept in keeping secret their devious plots.
No need to throw out the product with the person.
Not that I'm equating Wales with Hitler, just using an extreme case to make my point.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
This case with Jimmy shows how open initiatives win the day again. It doesn't matter if Jimmy Wales gets thrown into jail for murder, or if his character is undermined. It doesn't matter, because the only thing that matters is the positive contribution he made by founding Wikipedia and his later life or his personal details don't effect that.
It is like science, it doesn't matter who comes up with the evidence or the theory to explain it. The only thing that matters whether it's correct or not.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
from other nonprofits? Some CEOs of nonprofits get paid hundreds of thousands per year of donated money, and this guy can't treat three friends to a $325 meal? Not saying I approve of his conduct, but this isn't really that damning.
Now the real problem is that he, the creator of wikipedia, hasn't been able to convince some private company to give him lots of money. You think that'd do pretty well on a resume.
Good god, if this is corruption then about 95% of the people in middle and upper management should be in jail. When I read the headline I thought he had been caught embezzling a minimum of tens of thousands of dollars. I don't think that there are too many people who are innocent of having their company pay for an expense that was not 100% appropriate.
/.
Get real, this is small time stuff that is not even worth making it to the news much less
I couldn't care less if they go all high-school on each others personal accounts, or whether political biases are enforced through some "admin" abuses - those pages are not those which I find useful.
All this proves, even if true, is that the Wikipedians are human, just like the rest of us, and like to swing the lead or get something nice on expenses when possible.
Shock Story! Wikipedia moderators also human!
News at 11...
Because...
a) He is male
b) She is an attractive female
c) She let him see her naked and have sex with her
Speaking as a man, never underestimate a man's ability to overlook the obvious when there's potential nudity involved.
(I think Matt Groening said it best in his "Life in Hell" comic script: "Love is doomed to fail because men are stupid and women are crazy.")
Well, of course Wikipedia has no ethical problems. Any ethical problems that have been reported are quickly fixed. But perhaps you ask: what about the problems that just haven't been reported yet? Well, there aren't any, silly! I mean, of course there were problems in the past, but they've all been taken care of now. Everything is perfectly totally 100% okay. It will never be 100% okay, perfect, because it is a self-correcting system with a lot of morons. Something will always be wrong with it, but hopefully individual wrongs always get corrected (more just show up)