4 ms·

I feel like their language has always been desperate. Maybe they are trying new approaches because the old ones have grown tired. Personally, after a long histo

I feel like their language has always been desperate. Maybe they are trying new approaches because the old ones have grown tired. Personally, after a long history of donating to them, I stopped simply because the quality of the content has sunk so far due to all the political warfare on the Talk pages. Given even the founder thinks Wikipedia has become badly biased, maybe it isn’t so bad for them to come under hard times and for other competitors to pop up: https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/ https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/

BizarroLand 5y ago
I read that they experimented with non-desperate methods of fundraising and it decimated their income, but I don't remember where I read that.
- akolbe 5y ago
  That may well be true. But they are currently taking 15 times the annual amount they said they needed in 2013 to sustain their mission, and they would actually – literally – like to take 100 times the amount they said in 2013 was enough (see links above). The sky is the limit. They feel they should do things because they can raise money from Wikipedia, and then feel they should raise more money so they can do more. Meanwhile, salaries go up, and more and more paid staff are hired to create an ever-expanding bureaucracy that's quite removed from Wikipedia's volunteer culture. What you have here is a very clear case of mission creep. However, this change in mission is not reflected in the fundraising banners. The banners – as ever – give the impression that the Wikimedia Foundation is short of money for keeping Wikipedia, the one project everybody cares about, up and running. So there is a complete loss of transparency now. People think the mission is the same as it's ever been: they donate because they think money is needed to keep Wikipedia going. In fact, they're not funding what they think they are funding.
akolbe 5y ago
They are trying new approaches because they want more money. And they are successful. So far, revenue has increased every year. This year just gone they've taken almost ten times as much money as they did in 2010. Something the fundraising banners don't tell people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fundraising_statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fundraising_statisti...

BizarroLand 5y ago

I read that they experimented with non-desperate methods of fundraising and it decimated their income, but I don't remember where I read that.

akolbe 5y ago
That may well be true. But they are currently taking 15 times the annual amount they said they needed in 2013 to sustain their mission, and they would actually – literally – like to take 100 times the amount they said in 2013 was enough (see links above). The sky is the limit. They feel they should do things because they can raise money from Wikipedia, and then feel they should raise more money so they can do more. Meanwhile, salaries go up, and more and more paid staff are hired to create an ever-expanding bureaucracy that's quite removed from Wikipedia's volunteer culture. What you have here is a very clear case of mission creep. However, this change in mission is not reflected in the fundraising banners. The banners – as ever – give the impression that the Wikimedia Foundation is short of money for keeping Wikipedia, the one project everybody cares about, up and running. So there is a complete loss of transparency now. People think the mission is the same as it's ever been: they donate because they think money is needed to keep Wikipedia going. In fact, they're not funding what they think they are funding.

akolbe 5y ago

They are trying new approaches because they want more money. And they are successful. So far, revenue has increased every year. This year just gone they've taken almost ten times as much money as they did in 2010. Something the fundraising banners don't tell people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fundraising_statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fundraising_statisti...