2 ms·
This is a misframing of the issue here. It’s not that we should only consider hosting costs, I’ll eagerly concede this straw man argument is indeed poor. The
by ninth_ant 4y ago
This is a misframing of the issue here. It’s not that we should only consider hosting costs, I’ll eagerly concede this straw man argument is indeed poor.
The issue is that relative to other projects WMF runs, Wikipedia is more popular and also inexpensive to run.
Fundraising to users of the popular product, while diverting the funds raised to ancillary products is already misleading by itself.
Making urgent claims that the popular product may suffer without funds, when diverting those funds elsewhere — now it’s not just misleading but gives me a strong stench of being unethical.
- njovin 4y ago> Making urgent claims that the popular product may suffer without funds, when diverting those funds elsewhere — now it’s not just misleading but gives me a strong stench of being unethical. This reminds me of the emails the various US political parties send out around trending issues, ex. "You need to send us $5 TODAY to keep [opposing party] from [doing something that's in the news]." Obviously this money goes to the party fund and not to fighting the specific issue they're campaigning on and the wording of these is overly alarmist.