5 ms·
Wikipedia used BitPay, the most widely loathed of all cryptocurrency payment processors - https://debitpay.directory/anti-bitcoin/ https://debitpay.directory/an
by flotzam 5y ago
Wikipedia used BitPay, the most widely loathed of all cryptocurrency payment processors - https://debitpay.directory/anti-bitcoin/ https://debitpay.directory/anti-bitcoin/ - and required prospective donors to provide an obscene amount of personal data: https://bitpay.com/464448/donate https://bitpay.com/464448/donate
It's a high friction, culture-clashing payment flow. I certainly noped out of that form real fast.
For comparison: https://www.givedirectly.org/crypto/ https://www.givedirectly.org/crypto/
And another campaign on The Giving Block, an anonymity friendly donation payment processor: https://thegivingblock.com/campaigns/ukraine-emergency-response-fund/ https://thegivingblock.com/campaigns/ukraine-emergency-respo...
- numeri 5y agoThis is the real reason they received so few donations. I've only ever donated to them through Brave's Attention Tokens [1], so I never realized they use BitPay, but it really is intrusive. 1. I wonder if they'll keep this enabled or not?
- gwd 5y ago> 1. I wonder if they'll keep this enabled or not? I was wondering the same thing -- hopefully they will, as I'd like to see that model succeed.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- kuschku 5y ago> required prospective donors to provide an obscene amount of personal data Yes, that’s known as KYC laws, which are required if you’re a payment processor of any kind.
- flotzam 5y agoSeems more like preemptive overcompliance. Plenty of reputable charities accept anonymous donations just fine, whether it's cryptocurrency or cash by mail.
- marcinzm 5y agoGiven the financial size, global scope and dislike by certain governments of Wikipedia I see preemptive overcompliance as a very sane option.
- stjohnswarts 5y agoThis is a flaw in a service. Turning down free money isn't wise for a service that needs charity (from whatever sources) to continue existing.