3 ms·
So how would you prefer Wikipedia be funded? git-scm is mainly just a book put online and man pages, not a wiki. The archlinux wiki is obviously funded from don
by cooper12 9y ago
So how would you prefer Wikipedia be funded? git-scm is mainly just a book put online and man pages, not a wiki. The archlinux wiki is obviously funded from donations to the project itself. Wikipedia can't have a enterprise model like GitHub.
- erikb 9y agoI argue against lying and shoving ads into people's faces. Obviously I would prefer if they would get funding without these tricks. Showing you three projects that do should be proof enough that it is possible.
- cooper12 9y agoExcept those three projects don't have the same model at all... Wikipedia isn't a small print book that can fund a website. It's not part of a larger software project that receives donations ample enough to defray and costs of maintenance. (mediawiki is the underlying software, but it's not the project itself) Lastly, it can't have "private" articles like GitHub does. You can't just say "I'd prefer they not did this" while completely ignoring why they do it and without presenting any valid alternatives or models.
- erikb 9y agoYou still try to win the argument by presenting logical paradoxons instead of arguing. Having a different model is a possible, acceptable solution. Just not being annoying liers may result in success as well. Without the lies they would have made not as much profit, but they would have probably survived at the necessary level to continue providing the service.