4 ms·

That's what some people want. They're horrified there's a free platform providing useful content, where they can't profit off people's work.

by hugi 5y ago

AmericanChopper 5y ago
Your comment would make sense if moderating wikipedia cost that extra $102,000,000 we’re talking about. But it doesn’t. Wikimedia has one project I’m slightly interested in, and spends most of their money on other projects that I’m completely uninterested in, and would personally consider to be largely a useless waste of time. They aggressively fundraise with a message that implies their single product that everybody cares about is financially imperilled. In reality, if they’d been run responsibly, the one valuable thing they produce could have already been financially secured for decades into the future. I really just don’t care about what they spend most of their money on, I think they’re deceitful in the way that they fundraise, and all I hope is when all of their side projects eventually fail, that their core product survives in some form.
- SpelingBeeChamp 5y ago
  What are the “other projects” you are referring to?
  - AmericanChopper 5y ago
    Everything on this list that isn’t Wikipedia, along with essentially all of the research they fund. https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Complete_list_of_Wikimedia_projects https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Complete_list_of_Wikimedia... You don’t have to put it in air quotes like you’re making some sort of point. Calling everything they fund a “project” is the language Wikimedia use in their budgets and governance documentation. If you were actually having trouble thinking of a single project they operate other than Wikipedia, then perhaps you might also have some questions about what they do with 90% of their revenue.
    - SpelingBeeChamp 5y ago
      You are reading way too far into what I wrote. I was only asking a question. The “air quotes” were quotes. Because I was quoting you, and that’s when you’re supposed to use them. Like above. Thank you for the link. I was unaware.
      - AmericanChopper 5y ago
        Using quotation marks in that fashion is widely understood that is has its own wikipedia page (though they have a different name in print). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes But don’t worry. I’m sure you really were just “quoting [me]”.

That's what some people want. They're horrified there's a free platform providing useful content, where they can't profit off people's work.

by hugi 5y ago

That's what some people want. They're horrified there's a free platform providing useful content, where they can't profit off people's work.

AmericanChopper 5y ago

Your comment would make sense if moderating wikipedia cost that extra $102,000,000 we’re talking about. But it doesn’t. Wikimedia has one project I’m slightly interested in, and spends most of their money on other projects that I’m completely uninterested in, and would personally consider to be largely a useless waste of time. They aggressively fundraise with a message that implies their single product that everybody cares about is financially imperilled. In reality, if they’d been run responsibly, the one valuable thing they produce could have already been financially secured for decades into the future. I really just don’t care about what they spend most of their money on, I think they’re deceitful in the way that they fundraise, and all I hope is when all of their side projects eventually fail, that their core product survives in some form.

SpelingBeeChamp 5y ago
What are the “other projects” you are referring to?
- AmericanChopper 5y ago
  Everything on this list that isn’t Wikipedia, along with essentially all of the research they fund. https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Complete_list_of_Wikimedia_projects https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Complete_list_of_Wikimedia... You don’t have to put it in air quotes like you’re making some sort of point. Calling everything they fund a “project” is the language Wikimedia use in their budgets and governance documentation. If you were actually having trouble thinking of a single project they operate other than Wikipedia, then perhaps you might also have some questions about what they do with 90% of their revenue.
  - SpelingBeeChamp 5y ago
    You are reading way too far into what I wrote. I was only asking a question. The “air quotes” were quotes. Because I was quoting you, and that’s when you’re supposed to use them. Like above. Thank you for the link. I was unaware.
    - AmericanChopper 5y ago
      Using quotation marks in that fashion is widely understood that is has its own wikipedia page (though they have a different name in print). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes But don’t worry. I’m sure you really were just “quoting [me]”.