4 ms·

I don't pay for wikipedia (actually I do via donations and edits but that's not the point) but I don't see anything bad about their BM.

• tedeh 9y ago
  But Wikipedia is run by a non-profit organization...
  • orblivion 9y ago
    I'd say the more direct response is that with Wikipedia there is no product, in that sense of the word.
    • mcherm 9y ago
      There most certainly IS a product! The only way I can imagine that you came to believe there wasn't is that you were confused by the fact that they give their product away. Does Encyclopedia Britannica's website "britannica.com" have a product? Is Encarta a product? Of course they are, and so is Wikipedia, unless BY DEFINITION you exclude any "product" not exchanged for money from the definition of "product". And by that definition, the second can of beans I got at the grocery store on a buy-one-get-one-free sale wasn't a product -- which I feel demolishes the usefulness of the term.
      • orblivion 9y ago
        It's something that's produced, but not something sold (like Encarta). Accordingly you're right that it is a product. In the informal sense in which we talk about users "being the product" I'd call it not quite right, since there's nothing sold. The user doesn't have to worry as much about ulterior motives.