Hi I'm a lawyer from nigeria. Regarding the topic, he knows for one that should he go public, his shares are going to be bought out clean by faceless people who have been adversely affected by his publications and he'll end up fighting to regain control of his company in the end from phantoms who have scores to settle.
October 23rd, 2010 7:34 pm ET
my be the the real reason to keep the his view,characters about this sit.
October 24th, 2010 2:25 am ET
The interviewer seems to have never heard of a non-profit organization. Funny how he doesn't ask why the Wikimedia Foundation "charity" only spends 41 cents of every donated dollar on program services, earning it only 1 star (out of four) in organizational efficiency from Charity Navigator. Jimbo dodged that one!
Regardless, Jimmy Wales must be thrilled to be upstaged, once again, by WikiLeaks.
October 24th, 2010 6:36 pm ET
Wikipedia is simply NOT Jimmy Wales company. The decision to become public or stay private (whatever that might mean) is simply not Jimmy's decision.
On a second point, it is probably worth repeating again that
Wikileaks people are not affiliated with Wikipedia.
The people working on that project are not the same people as Wikimedians, and they have a different mission than wikimedians.
The only thing Wikileaks share with Wikipedia is FOUR LETTERS in the name.
Welcome! Join us for a behind-the-scenes look at CNN.com. We don't just want to talk about what we're doing, we want to have a conversation with you to see what you think. We need your help as we continue to evolve the way news is delivered online.