4 ms·
> Add to that a surprisingly under-the-radar company culture which has avoided any major blow ups despite its community wielding so much leverage over the world
by nsajko 6y ago
> Add to that a surprisingly under-the-radar company culture which has avoided any major blow ups despite its community wielding so much leverage over the world's education and having to make a lot of difficult calls on a daily basis.
There's been and still is plenty of controversy regarding both the Wikimedia Foundation and its relationship to the community of volunteers. In fact I'd say the whole thing's kind of rotten, because of many complicated issues.
- aerosmile 6y agoI am aware of many of their issues, especially on smaller international sites. But even so, on a risk-adjusted basis I think they've managed to avoid more drama than other teams would have pulled off given the environment they are in.
- bawolff 6y agoThat is interesting. As someone who used to work for the wikimedia foundation, it felt like there was a constant stream of drama. I guess when you are in the middle of it, it feels more intense than it actually is.
- bobthepanda 6y agoThere’s also the matter of scale and money. Wikipedia drama generally seems to happen less often and affect fewer “big” personalities and their money, than say Youtube and Google giving their content creators whiplash over whatever the new policy change is.
- kemayo 6y agoI think it's that we get drama which is big to us, but it rarely splashes outside the Foundation and the community to become common knowledge... and the dedicated community remains fairly insular. Maybe this will be the hidden drawback of the current work to improve talk pages -- all the wikidrama will become more visible to the world!