4 ms·
> What is the point of a site saying they don’t want to show ads, then covering up 50% of the screen with a request for money? No serious for-profit site would
by fletchowns 12y ago
> What is the point of a site saying they don’t want to show ads, then covering up 50% of the screen with a request for money? No serious for-profit site would consider giving up 50% of the page to an ad. It’s insane.
First of all, it's for like 1 or 2 weeks a year or whatever their fundraising period is. The donation request is not up there all the time. It is similar to how NPR raises money.
Second of all, Wikipedia is not a "serious for-profit site". I have no idea why you are making this comparison. Lets take a look at a "serious for-profit site" like nytimes.com or cnn.com. Oh look, there are ads everywhere, taking up a huge portion of the page. And they are there every single time you visit the site.
Stop trying to push your inferior competing site (newslines.org) with trash like this.
- emodendroket 12y agoAlso, donations are presumably less likely to have strings attached.
- VLM 12y agoThey should try that. I won't send them a penny until they fix their deletionist problem. "We're really proud we burn books because we only burn the ones we feel are bad" isn't a philosophy I can stomach funding.
- emodendroket 12y agoI wish they would delete fewer things too but that's not really what I'm thinking about so much as organizations demanding favorable coverage because of their advertising dollars.