Dave’s Conflict of Interest
March 3rd, 2008 by EyeOnWinerIt’s interesting to see Dave take sides on an issue when he genuinely hates both parties. Like today when he sides with Valleywag over Marsden-gate. Now, I care very little about this story, so I might have missed something, but I think Dave managed to pick the wrong side… (surprise!)
They got a good story because Wikipedia, the publication that Wales runs, has rules that prevent people from editing stories they have an interest in. Wales was trading edits to Rachel Marsden’s profile for sex. They got him, and had they left out the parts you don’t like, it wouldn’t have been clear that they did.
From reading through the articles, it appears that Wales didn’t actually trade edits at all. He sent proposed corrections to editors who were only willing to add them after fact-checking them, and he recused himself from the actual editing. So, as best I can tell, the only thing Wales was “trading sex” for was access to the editor email list… considering how many editors are public with their contact information, this hardly seems like a big deal. Is it really any different from Betsy Devine’s endless cheerleading for her buddy on the various pages that she thinks he deserves a mention? (I guess it is… as far as we know, Betsy’s not sleeping with Dave)
But, really, Dave siding with Valleywag shouldn’t be too surprising. Yesterday Dave posted quite an “oh poor me” whine about how his name isn’t anywhere on the “Blogging” topic on Wikipedia… though he doesn’t really say why it should be (probably because he invented blogging, right?). On top of that, Dave probably thinks sucking up to VW will keep them off of his tail.
You can always count on Dave to pick the most personally expedient option available to him. At least he’s predictable.
March 3rd, 2008 at 9:35 am
Wales didn’t have to edit it himself. He knew that any request he made on that secret list would get implemented. Since he’s been caught in the past by Wikipedia edit logs, he found a non-transparent way to exert his influence.
It’s pretty hypocritical, and an Eye on Wales would be kept pretty busy policing that assclown.
The way Wales works his followers is a lot like how Dave tries to game Wikipedia by whining on his blog. I don’t know that it’s working too well, though. The Dave Winer entry isn’t a puff piece by any stretch.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Dear “BS”,
Great post. You called Winer on his bullshit claims to be the godfather of blogging - or whatever other silly title he’s after. The worst part is his constant smearing of Wales. I don’t have any skin in this game but Wales has given back to this industry 100 fold more than has Winer. Keep calling
em as you seeem. Nice work