4 ms·

Here's another view of the WMF's runaway spending: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation#/media/File:Wikimedia_Foundation_financial_development_mul

Here's another view of the WMF's runaway spending: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation#/media/File:Wikimedia_Foundation_financial_development_multilanguage.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation#/media/Fi... I don't donate to the WMF because they don't need my money, but I wish they just kept Wikipedia running and made small incremental changes over time for scaling/keeping up to date/adding helpful features. I would of course donate if Wikipedia were at risk of failing (not that it would be that hard to rehost and rebuild it), and they know that and exploit everyone who doesn't realize how rich they are with the annoying begging. As they say: "The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy". If you keep giving a nonprofit money, it will keep growing, even if it has more than enough it needs for its earlier charter.

threatofrain 7y ago
But for how many years can Wikipedia run on that much money? IMO not having a large endowment which comfortably lasts a decade is irresponsible for the kind of resource Wikipedia presents to the world.
- circlefavshape 7y ago
  They're working on an endowment afaik
  - elect_engineer 7y ago
    Full disclosure: I am the author of the Wikipedia essay "Wikipedia has cancer". See https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C... Re: "They're working on an endowment afaik", Yes. They are. which is why I have called on the WMF to "build up our endowment, and structure the endowment so that the WMF cannot legally dip into the principal when times get bad." The danger I warn about in my essay is the WMF continuing to increase spending even if donations stop increasing. If they do that there is currently nothing stopping them from draining the endowment and spending it.
- jessriedel 7y ago
  I have heard just the opposite: that having a decade-length endowment is generally a sign of hording by the non-profit, and unlikely to be contributing to the mission. What scenario is there where Wikipedia is still providing value and fulfilling its mission but can't raise funds for a decade?
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    > What scenario is there where Wikipedia is still providing value and fulfilling its mission but can't raise funds for a decade? An extended economic downturn that dries up charitable donations.
    - MagnumOpus 7y ago
      The worst recession in three generations saw WMF donations increase by >50% year-over-year in every single year.
      - dragonwriter 7y ago
        The distributional impacts of major downturns and their effects on the groups donating to any particular charity aren't identical downturn to downtun; the fact that a particular major downturn didn't hurt WMF donations doesn't mean that would be true of the next one.
        jessriedel 7y ago
        What historical downturn are you thinking of, and how much did the revenue of any charity lower purely as a result of that downturn (and not, e.g., because the charity's mission was no longer relevant)?
        elect_engineer 7y ago
        It sounds like some here are of the opinion that Wikipedia's revenue will never take a nosedive for any reason and that the bubble will never burst. Now where have I heard that kind of talk before? Full disclosure: I am the author of the Wikipedia essay "Wikipedia has cancer"
elect_engineer 7y ago
Full disclosure: I am the author of the Wikipedia essay "Wikipedia has cancer". See https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C... Re: "Here's another view of the WMF's runaway spending", that same graph is part of my essay, but the version in my essay has links so you can see the sources used to create the graph.
zozbot234 7y ago
To be fair, some of that runaway spending does result in helpful features - perhaps enough to make it a net positive. Wikivoyage and especially Wikidata are highly successful sister projects that probably wouln't have happened on their own, or if WMF had simply "kept Wikipedia running and made small incremental changes over time".

threatofrain 7y ago

But for how many years can Wikipedia run on that much money? IMO not having a large endowment which comfortably lasts a decade is irresponsible for the kind of resource Wikipedia presents to the world.

circlefavshape 7y ago
They're working on an endowment afaik
- elect_engineer 7y ago
  Full disclosure: I am the author of the Wikipedia essay "Wikipedia has cancer". See https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C... Re: "They're working on an endowment afaik", Yes. They are. which is why I have called on the WMF to "build up our endowment, and structure the endowment so that the WMF cannot legally dip into the principal when times get bad." The danger I warn about in my essay is the WMF continuing to increase spending even if donations stop increasing. If they do that there is currently nothing stopping them from draining the endowment and spending it.
jessriedel 7y ago
I have heard just the opposite: that having a decade-length endowment is generally a sign of hording by the non-profit, and unlikely to be contributing to the mission. What scenario is there where Wikipedia is still providing value and fulfilling its mission but can't raise funds for a decade?
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > What scenario is there where Wikipedia is still providing value and fulfilling its mission but can't raise funds for a decade? An extended economic downturn that dries up charitable donations.
  - MagnumOpus 7y ago
    The worst recession in three generations saw WMF donations increase by >50% year-over-year in every single year.
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      The distributional impacts of major downturns and their effects on the groups donating to any particular charity aren't identical downturn to downtun; the fact that a particular major downturn didn't hurt WMF donations doesn't mean that would be true of the next one.
      - jessriedel 7y ago
        What historical downturn are you thinking of, and how much did the revenue of any charity lower purely as a result of that downturn (and not, e.g., because the charity's mission was no longer relevant)?
      - elect_engineer 7y ago
        It sounds like some here are of the opinion that Wikipedia's revenue will never take a nosedive for any reason and that the bubble will never burst. Now where have I heard that kind of talk before? Full disclosure: I am the author of the Wikipedia essay "Wikipedia has cancer"

elect_engineer 7y ago

Full disclosure: I am the author of the Wikipedia essay "Wikipedia has cancer". See https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C... Re: "Here's another view of the WMF's runaway spending", that same graph is part of my essay, but the version in my essay has links so you can see the sources used to create the graph.

zozbot234 7y ago

To be fair, some of that runaway spending does result in helpful features - perhaps enough to make it a net positive. Wikivoyage and especially Wikidata are highly successful sister projects that probably wouln't have happened on their own, or if WMF had simply "kept Wikipedia running and made small incremental changes over time".