zlacker

[parent] [thread] 8 comments
1. i_like+(OP)[view] [source] 2022-10-12 12:24:42
I give money to Wikipedia occasionally and will gladly continue, thanks.

Wikimedia makes the world a much better world place. They should have the funds to do whatever they want.

You’re mad at them for some reason because they have 400 mil? That’s not even half a billion.

I want a world where the Wikimedia foundation is a multi-billion dollar entity.

replies(4): >>stewx+L >>Bakary+O2 >>concor+k3 >>DeWild+is
◧
2. stewx+L[view] [source] 2022-10-12 12:29:31
>>i_like+(OP)
> Wikimedia makes the world a much better world place. They should have the funds to do whatever they want.

No doubt the world is better off with Wikipedia and Wikimedia, but the attitude that "they can do no wrong" is extremely dangerous. Any powerful organization, especially ones bringing in tens or hundreds of millions of dollars from the public, must be subjected to scrutiny and criticism. It is unhealthy not to do so.

replies(2): >>jamesp+Ph >>i_like+PL
◧
3. Bakary+O2[view] [source] 2022-10-12 12:44:02
>>i_like+(OP)
Wikipedia is great, Wikimedia spends a lot of money on vague nonsense. Some criticism is warranted so that we don't get another Mozilla-type dysfunction
◧
4. concor+k3[view] [source] 2022-10-12 12:47:10
>>i_like+(OP)
Note that wikipedia is 99.9% the volunteers selflessly putting in their time, not the 0.1% who are getting your money.
replies(2): >>denton+B5 >>i_like+tW
◧◩
5. denton+B5[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 12:59:06
>>concor+k3
For what it's worth, I enjoy editing WP. I'd enjoy it less if I were paid. I'd love to be able to edit some of the crap that the MSM pump out.
◧◩
6. jamesp+Ph[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 13:55:10
>>stewx+L
*voluntarily from the public
◧
7. DeWild+is[view] [source] 2022-10-12 14:39:02
>>i_like+(OP)
Problem isn't Wikimedia and the world might be a better place if they had a trillion dollars.

The problem is that the donation campaign is falsely being advertised as if to keep Wikipedia, the site itself, alive but is instead given to Wikimedia

Isn't that misleading, even if you support Wikimedia and what they do?

◧◩
8. i_like+PL[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 15:56:39
>>stewx+L
Sure. But I’m pleased with what I see.
◧◩
9. i_like+tW[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 16:42:04
>>concor+k3
You're implying there is something unfair going on with respect to not compensating editors. I absolutely disagree. The model is that anyone can edit, and they do so out of the love of knowledge and common wealth.

One of the strongest aspects of Wikipedia is that authors are not on anyone's payroll. (Though editing can be a competitive endeavor with monied interests occasionally involved).

All the editors of Wikipedia couldn't possibly be compensated, and no one expects that anyway.

[go to top]