I was responding to Andreas' comment on Wiki-PR's socks, specifically. I do not know the full story on Sarah yet, and agree I'd like to hear her side. On Jan 6, 2014 7:24 AM, "Fæ" <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6 January 2014 13:43, Todd Allen <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > ... The community expects to place more scrutiny on paid editors, not > less. > > Sarah has yet to give her side of events and confirm how much of this > is true or whether some of it is spoof or spin. Paid editing, of > itself, is not a crime, so this is more a question of understanding > how best practice and transparency should work for this sort of thing > and whether the conflicts of interest for WMF employees or temporary > contractors make it inadvisable and whether there are defined > circumstances that would forbid it. For example it would be a bizarre > hostage to fortune for a full time chief executive or trustee of a > Wikimedia Chapter to be a paid editor and/or paid advocate in their > "spare time". > > I have met Sarah in person a couple of times, and we had some good > stories and laughs to swap - having drinks and relaxing over dinner is > a much better way of getting to know someone than by reading about > them second hand. If Sarah is making paid editing work, then as a > leading experienced Wikimedian in Residence and GLAM person, she is > probably in a position to become a case study of what best practice > ought to be. Her GLAM work has been first class and leading edge, so > for what it's worth, I will always give her the benefit of the doubt > and bags of good faith; she is a lovely person, so I would ask others > to do the same and defer judgement and wait for all the facts to be on > the table and put in context. > > Odder has raised some reasonable questions and I look forward to Sarah > giving a considered reply. Considering some of the tangential and > points scoring emails funking up this thread, as well as the normal > unpleasantness elsewhere, I suggest she makes any reply under a new > thread if she thinks this list is suitable, or on the English > Wikipedia which is where any evidence really is. > > Thanks, > Fae > -- > fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
