3 ms·
So, in other 2005 news, The Register still hates Wikipedia. Honestly, I just don't get it. Sure, the culture can be off-putting. Sure, the donation drives ca
by redthrowaway 14y ago
So, in other 2005 news, The Register still hates Wikipedia. Honestly, I just don't get it. Sure, the culture can be off-putting. Sure, the donation drives can get annoying. But it's still a massive, eminently useful site run on a shoestring budget. The constant intimation that editors should be paid, a rather ridiculous assertion given the realities of open source communities, gives this piece the air of someone's personal gripe. It really does seem like someone set out to write a hit piece, then decided after what details to cherry pick in order to make it as hitty as possible.
One of these days, I'd be interested in finding out just what it is that makes The Register hate Wikipedia so much. The kind of vitriol you see from them is usually only matched by the Wikipedia Review, which leads me to believe that there's a jilted ex-editor somewhere on their staff whose mission is to expose the nasty, evil, free and open source encyclopedia to the world.
- rtkwe 14y ago$51 million isn't really a shoestring budget any way you cut it.
- redthrowaway 14y agoWikipedia serves more traffic than Amazon, Twitter, LinkedIn, or eBay. What's their budget?
- chris_wot 14y agoThe only one making potshots is Orlowski. Orlowski hates free culture in general, and is considered by most to be a troll, not a journalist.