3 ms·
That could have been conveyed in a much shorter article that doesn't discredit honest projects of community members. Also, I don't feel guilt-tripped. What do y
by Argorak 14y ago
That could have been conveyed in a much shorter article that doesn't discredit honest projects of community members. Also, I don't feel guilt-tripped. What do you expect? A multi-paragraph article on top of each page?
If you click through, for example in Germany, you get a pretty detailed explanation of where your money goes:
https://spenden.wikimedia.de/spenden/Ihre_Spende_wirkt https://spenden.wikimedia.de/spenden/Ihre_Spende_wirkt
The largest part: support for volunteers. Isn't that what Wikipedia is all about?
- smackfu 14y ago> Isn't that what Wikipedia is all about? That's the heart of the issue, right? Is the Wikimedia Foundation just supposed to run a website that is edited by volunteers, or is it supposed to also do other things that further the same goals as the actual Wikipedia? The foundation itself has the latter viewpoint, while I expect most people donating are just donating to pay for the former.
- Argorak 14y ago> I expect most people Please put numbers on the table, because I expect "most people" to be fully aware of how that non-profit thing works.
- smackfu 14y agoOk, fine. Neither side has numbers. But based on the pervasive banners, I thought wikipedia was still in dire straits and needed my money urgently just to keep the servers and bandwidth running. Now that I know they are doing just fine, I doubt I will contribute again. I'd rather put my charity donations to more worthy causes.
- rohamg 14y agome too. except add "needy" after "worthy".