4 ms·
I don’t understand the hate here. Wikipedia clearly states that the point of donations is to create an endowment. They need to get enough money for their princi
by 0wis 5y ago
I don’t understand the hate here.
Wikipedia clearly states that the point of donations is to create an endowment. They need to get enough money for their principal to generate enough money to ensure the project can live even in case of black swan events. [1]
They are still a long way from being independent from donors given their growth in projects, paid contributors (employees) and therefore expenses.
If you don’t agree with their governance or even specific ways they spend their money, stop donating, it is not like they are forcing you. You can even write an article an share it but don’t try to take shortcut like I feel it is done here. Money is a necessary ressource to survive, and if an entity have a lot of capital or spend plenty on projects or useful human ressources doesn’t imply evilness.
[1] : https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/endowment.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/endowment.asp
- okdjnfweonfe 5y agoThey would have an overfunded endowment if they didn't match their spending to their fundraising
- tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago> Wikipedia clearly states Where? This thread is the first time I remember reading about this, and I've seen a lot of Wikipedia beg-nags. They moved from outrageously deceptive messages that strongly implied that the lights would go out without my donation and that the donations were used to keep Wikipedia alive "for another year" [1], to slightly more vague "keep Wikipedia online and growing" [2] banners. Never did I see those banners mention an endowment. [1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/2012v2013factsbanners.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/2012v201... [2] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3a/Mob-lg-start-of-FY1718.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3a/Mob-lg-s...