Well at least there’s no meatsocking. We can all be thankful for that I think.
I make sure to clean up all my meatsocks every few weeks.
I understand that the current people in charge in Fiji used a service like WikiPR … the entry on Fiji is totally wrong and there is no mention that the current ‘prime minister’ was never elected … winners write the history books, or in this case, beef up their wiki entry …
I have to say, I have mixed feelings about this. Not about said meat-sockery. That’s a legitimate problem.
My issue is, Wikimedia controls the code. It seems like the first line of defense for a future-facing organization is to fix the problem, literally at the source. Design a solution that makes this problem go away.
Recall the hubbub around MP3s? “Your failed business model is not my problem.” Instead of litigating what will likely be an endless line of meaty puppet socks (like the hydra of old, cut off one head, two more will spring up in its place), fix the problem.
Do I have a solution? Of course not. I’m armchair commenter…};^)
Wikimedia is constrained here because their entire model is based on transparency. It’d be easy for them to say, “we don’t like that, we’re cutting you off”, but that would open up a zillion other judgement calls and invitations for others to test their edges.
Their approach makes a lot of sense to me. Establish clear legal precedent and keep the rules transparent and legally binding.
The problems of meat puppetry are larger than those faced by wikimedia, and any solution is going to be a much larger effort, with many more beneficiaries if it can work.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.