About

Download

  • A free mini-guide on how to blog a conference in detail, by Ethan Zuckerman and Bruno Giussani.

Search LoIP

  • Web LoIP

Get LoIP per email

  • Enter your email address:

Non-profit

Books by Bruno Giussani

« LIFT07: the private is invading the workplace, not the other way around | Main | links for 2007-02-14 »

February 11, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834517e6e69e200d834649ab669e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Wikimedia cash crunch story: what Devouard really said:

» Is Wikipedia really in danger from mathewingram.com/work
Update 2 @ 1:24 Feb. 11: More info on the exact nature of Ms. Devouards comments at Laurent Haugs blog hes one of the founders of Lift (a hat tip to Scoble for the link). Sounds like the three months is a bit of an exaggera... [Read More]

» Wikipedia doch nicht vor dem Aus from eniak.INFO
Seit ein paar Tagen geistert das Gercht ber die mgliche Schlieung von Wikipedia durch die Blogsphre. Vermutlich wurde diese Behauptung durch den Beitrag Wikipeda could shut within 3-4 months auf dem US Blog 9... [Read More]

Comments

I interviewed Florence Devouard at Lift07, the video is here:

http://charbax.com/2007/02/10/lift07-interview-of-florence-devouard/

If you want to talk about accuracy in this case, perhaps you should re-read the post at 901am I wrote, it didn't say "Wikipedia to shut down" as you've put in your post here, it said "Wikipedia could shut down", and there's a world of difference. If you also took the time to read it you'll note that I said "I smell a begging bluff on this one"...meaning that I didn't believe that Wikipedia would shut down because lets face it, the chances of this happening, no matter what she did or didn't say, are pretty close to zero.

Two other things: so I wasn't at the conference? I'm not allowed to report on what someone else suggested was said at the conference. Have we all got to be filthy rich or have a sugar daddy company to fund trips to Europe to make comments on this stuff? This sort of intellectual and financial snobbery wont get you far.

Secondly: you're running Captcha's on this blog. Perhaps there is some snobbery here, after all, you're intentionally barring people with visual disabilities from participating in the conversation here. Lets see: the not rich/ sugar daddy company free + visually impaired need not participate. Great set of morals you have.

Deep apologies for the slight misquote (I've corrected, but it was already easily verifiable by readers clicking on the link), but on the rest: Filthy rich? Sugar daddies? Gimme a break (LIFT is one of the cheapest conferences around). What about instead showing a tiny bit of humility and correcting your headline by updating your post, like your original source has done?
http://www.viadigitalis.org/index.php/?p=187
B.

"...you're running Captcha's [sic] on this blog. Perhaps there is some snobbery..."

Wow, equating captchas with snobbery is pretty agressive. I haven't labeled my home restroom or front door in braille but that doens't mean I am trying to keep visually impaired people out of my house.

I think Duncan needs a nap. Let's hope he manages to make more insightful and reasonable contributions to his own blog.

Just to put things right: the Wikimedia Foundation does not OWN Wikipedia.

The foundation owns the servers on which Wikipedia is hosted, as part of the object of the foundation which is to support free content projects such as Wikipedia, Commons, Wikiquote, Wikisource, etc.

The foundation also owns the name "Wikipedia"

But nobody owns Wikipedia if you consider Wikipedia as being the content, the encyclopedia.

Fair enough, Bradipus. I've changed that into "operates", which certainly better reflects the situation. Thanks for pointing that out. B.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Upcoming conferences