zlacker

[return to "Wikipedia is not short on cash"]
1. ripper+m8[view] [source] 2022-10-12 10:37:15
>>nickpa+(OP)
Eh. If you don't want to donate, don't, but I don't quite get the outrage here. The Wikimedia Foundation is still small as far as charities go and is visibly making Wikipedia better: the new UI is a breath of fresh air, and given the insane complexity of MediaWiki markup, the visual editor is a piece of unimaginable technical wizardry. Wiktionary is an unheralded gem and even Wikidata is starting to be genuinely useful.

For what it's worth, Charity Navigator gives them 4 out of 4 stars with a 98.33/100 rating: https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/200049703

Meanwhile eg the American Cancer Society gets 73/100 and spends more on fundraising than WMF's entire budget, so oncologists can snort blow off hookers in Vegas, but nobody cares.

◧◩
2. foldr+wc[view] [source] 2022-10-12 11:15:45
>>ripper+m8
> the American Cancer Society gets 73/100 and spends more on fundraising than WMF's entire budget, so oncologists can snort blow off hookers in Vegas

Is there a reference here that I'm missing?

◧◩◪
3. ripper+He[view] [source] 2022-10-12 11:32:52
>>foldr+wc
Apparently medical conferences are the biggest days of the year for the sex industry, although IIRC it was actually cardiologists who held the top spot.
◧◩◪◨
4. lupire+Af[view] [source] 2022-10-12 11:39:37
>>ripper+He
I don't think ACS is paying for the sex and drugs tho.
[go to top]