Nigel Farage resigns from his party saying it's become overrun by racists.

Robert Bernstein criticizes Human Rights Watch that he founded himself.

I guess they're just bitter right? Why consider anything they are actually saying?

For the record: I actually like Wikipedia and don't really see so much what Larry is talking about. I participated in starting articles on Wikipedia back in 2004, which have now grown and added a lot of useful information. But I'd like to hear him out.

The point is very much that we've now heard him out on about half a dozen different occasions and he's repeatedly shown an inability to deliver.

Its not that Sanger is criticizing wikipedia, its that his criticism isn't particularly insightful (imo) and its been getting repetitive.

Like all monopolies, criticism of wikipedia is essential to wikipedia. There is very little effective competition to wikipedia so criticism is important lest it becomes complacent. Sanger is just failing to deliver.

And it's that Sanger really isn't the expert on Wikipedia (or on community-building in general) that he claims to be. Sure, he was involved with Wikipedia in its early days -- but that was 20 years ago. That experience is largely irrelevant in commenting on Wikipedia as it exists today, because the organization has evolved significantly over that time, and he hasn't been involved in that process.