5 ms·

Infrastructure isn’t free. Happy to donate to Wikipedia on a yearly basis. And the emails are only once a year.

berkut 5y ago
Are other people only having a single email per year? This year I've had three (two in September, both from donate@wikimedia.org, and one from jimmy@wikipedia.org in October saying 'We've had enough').
andrewguenther 5y ago
If only it were once a year. Every quarter I get a whole thread spread out over a couple weeks. "Did you see our last email?" "There's still time to save Wikipedia!"
- extracharity 5y ago
  Hey I came across your comments pertaining to AWS confidentiality agreement. I just got an offer from AWS, would love to chat! Dont see your email on your profile
wyager 5y ago
Wikimedia spends like 95% of their money on stuff that isn’t Wikipedia. They’re a classic bloated NGO, where they have some initial mission they can do efficiently but they keep asking for money way down the diminishing returns curve.
- hguant 5y ago
  >they have some initial mission they can do efficiently Because the initial mission is still, by and large, done by volunteers and unpaid editors. Wikimedia is a bloated leech
- loeg 5y ago
  To substantiate these (accurate) claims: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C...
qweqwweqwe-90i 5y ago
Food isn't free either, but I haven't been sending Bill Gates money every year to help him buy his own food.
- Aachen 5y ago
  I didn't know Gates ran a non profit that provided you with food/content/whatever on a daily basis. Not sure in what other scenario this comparison makes sense.
that_guy_iain 5y ago
They don‘t need the money tho. They have enough money, I believe, to run without raising anymore money for 1.0-years.
tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
That's part of the problem - they have way more money than needed to run the infrastructure, but when they beg for more, they make it sound like they might not have enough to keep the lights on. They're very firmly on my "do not give money to" list, together with Mozilla (donations go to everything EXCEPT Firefox development, which isn't made particularly clear when you donate, and much of their other stuff isn't worth supporting IMO).
tpmx 5y ago
Congrats on your first post. Welcome to HN.

Are other people only having a single email per year? This year I've had three (two in September, both from donate@wikimedia.org, and one from jimmy@wikipedia.org in October saying 'We've had enough').

andrewguenther 5y ago

If only it were once a year. Every quarter I get a whole thread spread out over a couple weeks. "Did you see our last email?" "There's still time to save Wikipedia!"

extracharity 5y ago
Hey I came across your comments pertaining to AWS confidentiality agreement. I just got an offer from AWS, would love to chat! Dont see your email on your profile

wyager 5y ago

Wikimedia spends like 95% of their money on stuff that isn’t Wikipedia. They’re a classic bloated NGO, where they have some initial mission they can do efficiently but they keep asking for money way down the diminishing returns curve.

hguant 5y ago
>they have some initial mission they can do efficiently Because the initial mission is still, by and large, done by volunteers and unpaid editors. Wikimedia is a bloated leech
loeg 5y ago
To substantiate these (accurate) claims: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C...

qweqwweqwe-90i 5y ago

Food isn't free either, but I haven't been sending Bill Gates money every year to help him buy his own food.

Aachen 5y ago
I didn't know Gates ran a non profit that provided you with food/content/whatever on a daily basis. Not sure in what other scenario this comparison makes sense.

that_guy_iain 5y ago

They don‘t need the money tho. They have enough money, I believe, to run without raising anymore money for 1.0-years.

tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago

That's part of the problem - they have way more money than needed to run the infrastructure, but when they beg for more, they make it sound like they might not have enough to keep the lights on. They're very firmly on my "do not give money to" list, together with Mozilla (donations go to everything EXCEPT Firefox development, which isn't made particularly clear when you donate, and much of their other stuff isn't worth supporting IMO).

tpmx 5y ago

Congrats on your first post. Welcome to HN.