Wikitribune - the next great Wales failure

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 12:05 am

Guardian: Wikipedia founder to fight fake news with new Wikitribune site

Reddit comments
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comme ... _with_new/

The website is perpetually unreachable (503), but when I did get in (Powered by Impossible), I found the most delightful section

Advisors:
* Guy Kawasaki
* Jeff Jarvis
* Lily Cole

Mr Jarvis, I am unfamiliar with.
Mr Kawasaki is a useless turd in the punch bowl whose sole life accomplishment is being as big a self-promoter as Kim Kardashian
Ms Cole is a 'model' whose signature look appeals primarily to child molesters.

What would either of these two dingbats know about:
* Journalism
* Ethics
* Crowd sourcing information
* Wikipedia
* Running a news operation

Seriously, you could have chosen two people at random from a soup kitchen line or from the Home Depot parking lot and had a better brain trust right out of the gate.

Tarc · Unread post by **Tarc** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 1:27 am

Ms. Cole & Jimmy have been entwined for awhile; http://wikipediocracy.com/2015/01/11/wi ... symbiosis/

Jarvis the the buzzmachine.com guy.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 3:47 am

Vigilant wrote: * Jeff Jarvis

Great post, Vigilant -- good to see you.

Regarding Jarvis, Wikipedia has this interesting tidbit about him:

Jarvis is the subject of a popular Twitter parody account, @ProfJeffJarvis, curated by Rurik Bradbury.[19] The parody account has been enthusiastically received among many in media circles with over 12,000 followers.[20] “I chose Jarvis because he epitomizes a certain type of ‘thinkfluencer,’ ” Bradbury explains, “someone with an online influence massively greater than the thoughtfulness of his positions. It's all style and rhetorical flourishes which don't stand up to scrutiny—but do grab attention.”[19] Jarvis is not a fan of @ProfJeffJarvis, calling Bradbury, "my minor tormentor, my idiot imposter, my personal troll." He reached out to a Twitter executive to complain, but declined to pursue further action.[21]

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 3:57 am

If you can bear it...

Unread post by **tarantino** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:25 am

"This domain's privacy is protected by contactprivacy.com" and it's hidden behind cloudflare, just like ISIS.

Rogol Domedonfors · Unread post by **Rogol Domedonfors** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:10 am

I see that this happens shortly after the WMF spends donors money pronouncing loudly on the terrible dangers of fake news. It's almost as if they were advertising on behalf of this new venture.

Also on board, according to the BBC is Lawrence Lessig (T-H-L).

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:20 am

So, no wikipedia experts nor any journalism experts on the board of a wiki-news venture.

Is this some sort of sick 'The People's Operator' cosplay?!

Rogol Domedonfors · Unread post by **Rogol Domedonfors** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:27 am

i think one point of similarity with TPO is that Mr Wales will be the CEO again, presumably on a handsome salary.

MrWallace · Unread post by **MrWallace** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:21 am

This idea is not original at all. It sounds very much like Larry Sanger's Infobitt which was launched some years ago but failed to gain traction. Is this another example of Wales claiming credit from a Sanger idea?

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=5623

Kingsindian · Unread post by **Kingsindian** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 9:00 am

From the Guardian article:

Wales intends to cover general issues, such as US and UK politics, through to specialist science and technology.

Those who donate will become supporters, who in turn will have a say in which subjects and story threads the site focuses on. And Wales intends that the community of readers will fact-check and subedit published articles.

Describing Wikitribune as “news by the people and for the people,” Wales said: “This will be the first time that professional journalists and citizen journalists will work side-by-side as equals writing stories as they happen, editing them live as they develop, and at all times backed by a community checking and rechecking all facts.”

This is not a new idea. I don't know if Jimbo realizes this, but this kind of model can go in some very weird directions. From a post of mine a few months ago:

Kingsindian wrote:I found this weird site wesearchr.com. From what I can see, it works on the Google Answers model.

The questions seem to be a mix of the most paranoid elements of Gamergate and Trump supporters, but that is perhaps due to the editors' tendencies. They claim to have raised a lot of money for "crowdsourced journalism".

Dan Murphy points out further down in the thread: the site in question is run by white supremacist Charles Johnson. "Crowdsourcing" is not magic pixie dust. One needs some sort of editorial filter or community norms so that it does not become a cesspool or crank magnet.

Rogol Domedonfors · Unread post by **Rogol Domedonfors** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 9:22 am

One way in which this venture may be ill thought out is the question of what the demand is. People who want to read trustworthy news from a source that is not supported by any kind of advertising can already go to the BBC. People who want to read a reputable traditional news source with advertising support can go to newspapers such as the Telegraph or the Guardian (I notice that Wales conflates adverising with clickbait, presumably deliberately). Why would a reader see this new model as giving them anything they cannot already get for free elsewhere, and from sources with decades-long reputations?

Of course there'll be a demand from advertisers for it. The model sounds ideal for getting spin and point of view covered as if it were news. Wales says "If you can get together a certain number of people who are interested in Bitcoin [for example] and you flag that when you sign up as a monthly supporter, then we'll hire a Bitcoin person to do the beat full-time," That's great – if you're a lobbyist. Getting your product or position into the news as if it's one of the significant news topics of the day is a PR dream.

In short Wales is proposing a new model for fake news. And he wants to proft from it.

trout · Unread post by **trout** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 12:12 pm

Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales exits Guardian board over conflict of interest with Wikitribune news site

Jimmy Wales, the co-founder of Wikipedia, will leave the board of the Guardian newspaper after opting to launch his own rival news operation that will compete for staff, stories and donations.

The 50-year-old, who joined the board of Guardian Media Group as a non-executive director little over a year ago, has revealed plans to launch Wikitribune, an outlet aiming to provide "factual and neutral" news coverage. Mr Wales has said he plans to hire up to 20 journalists to work on the operation.

milowent · Unread post by **milowent** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 12:45 pm

So is this more of a return to the Nupedia concept? One reason it might work this time is because of Jimmy/Wikipedia's fame will bring in enough supporters to fund it. They have 1376 monthly supporters signed up as I type this (amount not listed). There are many podcasts and youtubers supported by monthly donations, that you wouldn't think could possibly stay solvent, but they do.

"Articles are authored, fact-checked, and verified by professional journalists and community members working side by side as equals, and supported not primarily by advertisers, but by readers who care about good journalism enough to become monthly supporters. "

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 1:46 pm

Vigilant wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... ibune-site

Your comments are currently being pre-moderated

How surprising.

MrErnie · Unread post by **MrErnie** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:01 pm

Is Wikitribune going to be considered a reliable source?

Kingsindian · Unread post by **Kingsindian** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:46 pm

Should probably be merged with the Wikitribune thread.

Rogol Domedonfors · Unread post by **Rogol Domedonfors** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 3:57 pm

The title of this thread – "the next great Wales failure" – is somwhat ambivalent. The venture itself will almost certainly fail, and the supporters will have wasted their money. On the other hand, Jimmy Wales will presumably get a couple of year's salary out of it, and maintain his reputation as an internet entepreneur (where failure is somehow a badge of success). So for him, it will most probably be a success.

Rogol Domedonfors · Unread post by **Rogol Domedonfors** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:06 pm

The Wikitribune Terms of Use state that the "Services shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of 8A Nottingham Place, London W1U 5NB" whch is not the latest micronation, but the registered address of a new company, Jimmy Group Ltd, register number 10713170, incoroprated by Jimmy Donal Wales on 7 April 2017,as sole shareholder. There appears to be no company called Wikitribune, and the website fails to disclose the name of the company, which is a breach of UK company law.

Ming · Unread post by **Ming** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:47 pm

The Atlantic is unimpressed.

charliemouse · Unread post by **charliemouse** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:01 pm

I think Wales has finally lost whatever's left of his mind. A completely idiotic idea.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:48 pm

Rogol Domedonfors wrote:The Wikitribune Terms of Use state that the "Services shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of 8A Nottingham Place, London W1U 5NB" whch is not the latest micronation, but the registered address of a new company, Jimmy Group Ltd, register number 10713170, incoroprated by Jimmy Donal Wales on 7 April 2017,as sole shareholder. There appears to be no company called Wikitribune, and the website fails to disclose the name of the company, which is a breach of UK company law.

Wish I could see that info...

All I get at Wikitribune.com is:

Rogol Domedonfors · Unread post by **Rogol Domedonfors** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:16 pm

You get what you pay for.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:39 pm

Ming wrote:The Atlantic is unimpressed.

The author studied at Michigan State University, so that bodes well.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:50 pm

Is this the final nail in the coffin for Wikinews? The site's barely alive as it is.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:54 pm

Why has he thrown away a nice little prestigious part-time job? Is he really so confident that Wikitribune will be a roaring success? I wonder what his wife and her Guardian-loving friends, who presumably got him that job, think of it?

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:28 pm

Poetlister wrote:Is this the final nail in the coffin for Wikinews? The site's barely alive as it is.

Not the final nail at all -- a new rebirth is in store for Wikinews, because Jimbo says that the WikiTribune will be CC-BY, and copyable into Wikinews! It's a win for everyone!

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 9:51 pm

I've got a shiny dollar says he was being kicked to the curb and left to fail somewhere new.

collect · Unread post by **collect** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:02 pm

thekohser wrote:
Poetlister wrote:Is this the final nail in the coffin for Wikinews? The site's barely alive as it is.
Not the final nail at all -- a new rebirth is in store for Wikinews, because Jimbo says that the WikiTribune will be CC-BY, and copyable into Wikinews! It's a win for everyone!

Weird. Wikimedia likely has some trademark rights to this variant, as it clearly can be confused with Wikinews, already trademarked?

In addition, "Jimmy Group" does not appear to be a registered not-for-profit corporation?

And there is a question as to whether any of the DNC-connected firms under contract to Wikimedia has any potential connection to this new venture.

And, of course, to the extent that it will harm The Guardian financially, is Jimmy in the clear? Clearly this was planned while he was a trustee of that newspaper, and privy to information concerning that paper.

So many issues, so little data.

Kevin · Unread post by **Kevin** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:47 pm

collect wrote:And, of course, to the extent that it will harm The Guardian financially, is Jimmy in the clear? Clearly this was planned while he was a trustee of that newspaper, and privy to information concerning that paper.

Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales exits Guardian board over conflict of interest with Wikitribune news site

You have to wonder what was going on behind the scenes for the past few weeks.

Tarc · Unread post by **Tarc** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 11:09 pm

Jimmy's latest talk page gadfly Nocturnalnow (T-C-L) (1432 edits, 37% of those to User talk:Jimbo Wales

) provides slobbering f-bomb laden praise;

Fantastic!!!'' Its about fuckin' time that the public gets to see and judge for themselves the credibility of the actual sources of the most important information and news that comes our way. Many of the "so called" journalists who work for establishment media have been able to throw out any kind of bullshit and pro- or anti- personal, corporate, or governmental spin/propaganda and justify it with "our sources tell us" or "my sources tell me" or "off the record sources confirm" or "sources suggest" or "my military sources say its likely" or even "anonymous sources reveal" and an entire book of other similar "hide the source" phraseology when they publish their biased ''bullshit''. As far as [[Woodward and Bernstein]] go, who gives a flyin' fuck what they think...they had one good story 45 years ago and have not done a fuckin' thing since except blatantly puff up or degrade various politicians with their personal opinions and write a bunch of biographies, imo.

Meanwhile, Mr Ernie (T-C-L) raises an interesting point;

Hi Jimbo. Would you say a goal of Wikitribune is to have a reliability level such that we could source Wikipedia articles from Wikitribune?

Wikipedia editors having a hand in both article writing and reliable source creation? What could possibly go wrong?

Earthy Astringent · Unread post by **Earthy Astringent** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 11:47 pm

A few clicks away and one can find Ms. Cole has her very own tag at some strange site called PopSugar.com.

Wales does have this strange association with prepubescent looking women. Coincidence?

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:34 am

Tarc wrote:Jimmy's latest talk page gadfly Nocturnalnow (T-C-L) (1432 edits, 37% of those to User talk:Jimbo Wales ) provides slobbering f-bomb laden praise;

Fantastic!!!'' Its about fuckin' time that the public gets to see and judge for themselves the credibility of the actual sources of the most important information and news that comes our way. Many of the "so called" journalists who work for establishment media have been able to throw out any kind of bullshit and pro- or anti- personal, corporate, or governmental spin/propaganda and justify it with "our sources tell us" or "my sources tell me" or "off the record sources confirm" or "sources suggest" or "my military sources say its likely" or even "anonymous sources reveal" and an entire book of other similar "hide the source" phraseology when they publish their biased ''bullshit''. As far as [[Woodward and Bernstein]] go, who gives a flyin' fuck what they think...they had one good story 45 years ago and have not done a fuckin' thing since except blatantly puff up or degrade various politicians with their personal opinions and write a bunch of biographies, imo.
Meanwhile, Mr Ernie (T-C-L) raises an interesting point;

Hi Jimbo. Would you say a goal of Wikitribune is to have a reliability level such that we could source Wikipedia articles from Wikitribune?
Wikipedia editors having a hand in both article writing and reliable source creation? What could possibly go wrong?

Every news article has the potential to turn into the Gamergate_controversy (T-H-L)

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:05 am

Already there's an article which should be speedied.

Wikitribune (T-H-L)

Wikitribune is an organisation that is to be funded by donors, and never by selling advertising space. The more funds they raise, the more journalists they can employ.[6] Crowdfunding opened on 25 April 2017.[7] Supporters are being asked to pay £10 or $15 per month,[8] but access to the news will be free.[7] It has been stated that having no shareholders, advertisers or subscribers will reduce commercial pressures and that paying members will be able to suggest topics.[5] Supporters who donate to the site will also help decide which subjects the site will focus on.[3]

What could possibly go wrong?

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:09 am

The Dailymail let's him have it...

Wikipedia boss Jimmy Wales is accused of hypocrisy over new website he says will tackle 'fake news'

Despite claims that his online encyclopaedia is riddled with inaccuracies, the internet entrepreneur said his new Wikitribune site would produce ‘fact- checked, global news stories.’

Tory MP Damian Collins, chairman of the Commons’ Culture, Media and Sport Committee, which launched an inquiry into fake news, said: ‘I don’t see this as the answer to fake news. The site could easily be abused and distribute fake stories as legitimate news.

‘By giving them a veneer of credibility this increases the likelihood that people will bemisled into believing something that is not true. Wikipedia is already full of errors and the owners don’t have the resources to deal with these abuses.’

Conservative backbencher Andrew Bridgen said: ‘Wikipedia has become a byword for inaccuracy. How can Jimmy Wales preach on about fake news? It looks a bit hypocritical. If the crowd-funders are able to edit the news service, there is a real risk that it will just attract the same niche-interest cranks who edit the website.

‘Jimmy Wales claims the news service will be politically-neutral but he is in deep with those on the liberal Left.’

Anyone think that this won't become a clearing ground for Friends of Jimmy to axe grind old conflicts?

Johnny Au · Unread post by **Johnny Au** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:29 am

Vigilant wrote:Every news article has the potential to turn into the Gamergate_controversy (T-H-L)

Even those that don't involve entertainment media or identity politics.

Unread post by **tarantino** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 3:18 am

David Gerard says, "I was one of the Wikipedians at the hackathon days for this, a few weeks ago."
Way to surround yourself with winners, Jimmy.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:05 am

David Gerard, the perennial turd in the punch bowl. How surprising...

Silent Editor · Unread post by **Silent Editor** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 9:53 am

NocturnalNow wrote: As far as [[Woodward and Bernstein]] go, who gives a flyin' fuck what they think...they had one good story 45 years ago and have not done a fuckin' thing since except blatantly puff up or degrade various politicians with their personal opinions and write a bunch of biographies, imo.

I could be wrong, but I thought talk pages were covered by the BLP policy. I guess not.

Soldado Sin Nombre · Unread post by **Soldado Sin Nombre** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:14 pm

Oh shit, something is "broken"......again......and this time it's the news. Jimbo is here to help fix it with his newest brainchild, Wikitribune. Jimbo really likes the formula of pronouncing something broken, even though Jimbo has never before proven helpful in repairing broken things despite repeated attempts. Here he is opinion on something else that's "broken" but way back in 2006, when his arc was still on an upward trajectory:

“[Search] is broken for the same reason that proprietary software is always broken: lack of freedom, lack of community, lack of accountability [and] lack of transparency. Here, we will change all that.”

I see this one following the path of a the latest North Korean nuclear missile. Instead of blowing up on the launching pad, like Wikia Search did, this one will fly a few hundred feet, then sputter and fizzle out after a few minutes in the air. Will anyone remember in 30 to 60 days? We'll see.

Kim Jong-un never gives up trying to be a big dog, and neither does Jimbo.

http://www.newser.com/story/241801/wiki ... -news.html

milowent · Unread post by **milowent** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:45 pm

thekohser wrote:
Ming wrote:The Atlantic is unimpressed.
The author studied at Michigan State University, so that bodes well.

From the Atlantic piece:

Adrienne LaFrance at The Atlantic wrote:The larger problem with WikiTribune is this: Someone who is paid for doing journalistic work cannot be considered “equals” with someone who is unpaid

I don't think this is the major problem to the project, but certainly is a problem for paid journalists. A volunteer can do good work, but they need to establish a credible reputation for quality work before their work can be accepted. I am sure we'll see lots of chafing between volunteers and the journalist-gatekeepers at WikiTribune. "Randy from Boise" is going to be pissed that he is not being accommodated. Gatekeepers have worked on sites like Daily Kos and Little Green Footballs where bloggers with good content on a personal page can be promoted to the site's front page. But none of these sites, even if popular, seek to develop a reputation as an arbiter of only the truth.

I still think the biggest problem is what she describes having occurred on a prior project (Peer News/Honolulu Civil Beat) -- the massive amount of manpower needed to keep articles up to date with official gatekeeper staff:

Adrienne LaFrance at The Atlantic wrote:But for our small newsroom—which was, at the time, around the same size as what Wales is proposing for WikiTribune, keeping topic pages updated was a slog. It certainly didn’t happen in real time. We were busy reporting and breaking news.

milowent · Unread post by **milowent** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:47 pm

should be merged? to ---> viewtopic.php?f=6&t=8304
Done. --Zoloft

MrErnie · Unread post by **MrErnie** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:45 pm

What does Jimbo think that 10 reporters and an army of anonymous, biased, agenda pushing social reporters can realistically accomplish? How are they going to "fix" anything? A journalist needs to be out and about, following up leads, meeting sources, chasing down hunches, interviewing politicians and public figures, etc. Is it realistic to expect that Wikipedia editors are signing up for press passes for the White House, calling politicians for interviews, or whatever else? Imagine some mouth breathing white knight calling you up and arguing with you like you see up and down talk pages all across Wikipedia? The more I think about how this will realistically turn out, the less chance of success I feel it has.

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 4:35 pm

Well, with the UK telephone cash cow sputtering we should all have expected the next great adventure of Earth's favorite "internet entrepreneur" would be ramping up...

link https://www.wikitribune.com/[/link]

RfB

Rogol Domedonfors · Unread post by **Rogol Domedonfors** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 6:08 pm

collect wrote:Weird. Wikimedia likely has some trademark rights to this variant, as it clearly can be confused with Wikinews, already trademarked?

In addition, "Jimmy Group" does not appear to be a registered not-for-profit corporation?

And there is a question as to whether any of the DNC-connected firms under contract to Wikimedia has any potential connection to this new venture.

And, of course, to the extent that it will harm The Guardian financially, is Jimmy in the clear? Clearly this was planned while he was a trustee of that newspaper, and privy to information concerning that paper.

So many issues, so little data.

Let me add a crumb. The trademark "Wikitribune" was applied for by Jimmy Group Ltd on 19 April 2017, according to the UK Intellectual Property Office. Jimmy Group was incorporated on 6 April 2017 as a "private company limited by shares" using the model articles. Jimmy Wales is the sole shareholder. This is the normal setup for a commercial company, not a charity (which would typically by "limited by guarantee" with a different set of articles). Neither Wikitribune nor Jimmy Group is a registered charity. In short, all the indications are that Jimmy Group is a conventional trading company ("for-profit" in American) with Wikitribune as its trademark, wholly owned by Jimmy Wales.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 6:42 pm

Rogol Domedonfors wrote:In short, all the indications are that Jimmy Group is a conventional trading company ("for-profit" in American) with Wikitribune as its trademark, wholly owned by Jimmy Wales.

That should make it super-easy to skim off the top whatever amount he feels deserving of, every time he wants to go on a nice vacation or buy a new toy, right? I mean, he's working really, really hard on this -- even stayed up late one night! He's entitled to a good portion of the donors' cash.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 7:26 pm

Here is Jimbo's own statement.

Today I announced a new initiative, outside of my Wikimedia activities, to combat fake news. It is important to me that I share directly with all of you information about this new initiative early on.

The new project will use a wiki-style setup and experiment with bringing together professional journalists and community contributors to produce fact-checked, global news stories. At launch, we'll be using a hacked version of wordpress and we'll be evaluating whether that's the right tool moving forward. Wordpress has a lot to commend it (free software, mature platform, used by lots of newsrooms, active developer ecosystem) but also has some philosophy that's quite "top down" in a way.

(Not many people would think in a wiki way when setting up a newsroom!)

This new initiative, Wikitribune, will be a learning experience - my vision is one that I've had a hard time explaining... except to Wikimedians who tend to immediately get it.

While I am launching this project independent from Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation, it is my plan that this new project will work alongside Wikimedia in the free knowledge movement. For example, I hope that the numerous Wikinews/Wikinoticias/Wikinotizie/etc. communities can collaborate with the Wikitribune community in way that allows both to learn and benefit from each other. Additionally, Wikitribune will utilize the same Creative Commons license (CC-BY) as other free content projects in the news space - so they can take the stories written by our professional journalists and communities and make use of them.

You can find out more information about Wikitribune at: https://www.wikitribune.com

Thank you for your time and I'm happy to answer questions! (But I'm quite swamped with everything at the moment so please forgive me if I answer in bursts!)

--Jimbo

Comment is superfluous!

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 7:45 pm

trout wrote:Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales exits Guardian board over conflict of interest with Wikitribune news site
Jimmy Wales, the co-founder of Wikipedia, will leave the board of the Guardian newspaper after opting to launch his own rival news operation that will compete for staff, stories and donations.

The 50-year-old, who joined the board of Guardian Media Group as a non-executive director little over a year ago, has revealed plans to launch Wikitribune, an outlet aiming to provide "factual and neutral" news coverage. Mr Wales has said he plans to hire up to 20 journalists to work on the operation.

Not too shocking that the Guardian board has higher standards than the WMF.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 7:46 pm

Pimpin' Jimmy over in bitcoin trying to dazzle the rubes.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/commen ... kitribune/

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 7:49 pm

There is some discussion, including by our friend Rogol, over whether Jimbo can continue to be a trustee of WMF since Wikitribune is a conflict of interest. It won't go anywhere of course; he survived similar claims over Wikia.

Rogol Domedonfors · Unread post by **Rogol Domedonfors** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:23 pm

Oh, very likely. But it serves to make the point that, assuming the Board keeps him on, they do so in the full knowledge of his conflict of interest. It might support a case against the Board collectively for dereliction of duty. I don't know who would have standing to bring such a case under Florida non-profit law – presumably the state's Department of State Division of Corporations or possibly the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Division of Consumer Services.