Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

meta.wikimedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 401 posts

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#111

Post by Aachen »

mardifoufs wrote: post #37

Honestly the reasoning is weird. Don't get me wrong, I think crypto currencies are for the most part a scam, a ponzi scheme or a platform for pump and dumps. Yet the whole thing just does not make sense imo. It's one thing to be against crypto, but refusing it when you are a charity for the most asinine moral purity tests is absurd. This 100% reminds me of the almost cultist like extremely negative reaction to anythi…

Regarding flying people out to do things while citing cryptocurrency climate issues: the former is unavoidable given the goal while the latter has more efficient alternatives in the vast majority of relevant circumstances.

That's not to say that I'm thus for or against this ban, or for or against flying people out to edit a website from a central location together (assuming that's what wiki mania meetups are), just that the flaw in the logic is that flying isn't practically avoidable if you want to meet up from across the world, while donations have a thousand other avenues (and for those who aren't able to make a donation now from North Korea or so, it's not to their disadvantage, it's not like Wikipedia was a VPN provider, or like you want to hide a Wikileaks donation from your government). This happens in a lot of the whataboutism around doing one thing for the climate while not being perfect because you still do this other thing.

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#112

Post by 0xRolex »

jackvalentine wrote: post #87
0xRolex wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be the same line regarding fiat so kinda low i'd say

Should they accept anything that can be exchanged for fiat without too much fuss?

I don't know, do they really check who donated fiat comes from and refuse donations when it comes from, let's say, anyone involved in anything against their values ?

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#113

Post by 0xRolex »

josefx wrote: post #72
0xRolex wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even though the arguments in support of the ban are to be taken into account it's right that the arguments in opposition make a lot of sense and it doesn't seem like they've been taken into account. When you're begging for money you don't spit on a way to get some more because you disagree with some stuff it's related, you look for solutions to please everyone. As you said a lot of what's actually done with cryptocur…

> When you're begging for money But that is just it, Wikipedia isn't that desperate for money that it has to do tricks for con artists and scammers. Now if Wikipedia was tethering at the edge of non existence it might be excusable, but it isn't, it is making enough to keep running without pandering to the scum of the earth.

First i'd love it if out of pure courtesy you avoided using stuff like "the scum of the earth" to describe people you disagree with because it doesn't help in any way. Then with banners like "Help us save Wikipedia, Wikipedia is in danger, donate" on the website at least a month per year I have to disagree with your "Wikipedia isn't desperate for money"

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#114

Post by 5560675260 »

jackvalentine wrote: post #87
0xRolex wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be the same line regarding fiat so kinda low i'd say

Should they accept anything that can be exchanged for fiat without too much fuss?

Yes? As long as "without too much fuss" holds - I don't see why not.

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#115

Post by [deleted] »

numeri wrote: post #50
flotzam wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia used BitPay, the most widely loathed of all cryptocurrency payment processors - https://debitpay.directory/anti-bitcoin/ - and required prospective donors to provide an obscene amount of personal data: 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/ And another campaign on…

This 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?

[deleted]

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#116

Post by 0xRolex »

5560675260 wrote: post #114
jackvalentine wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should they accept anything that can be exchanged for fiat without too much fuss?

Yes? As long as "without too much fuss" holds - I don't see why not.

Then why not just accept serious stablecoins ? No speculations over it, just a virtual dollar, energy efficient allowing freedom and privacy to a lot ?

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#117

Post by Liquid_Fire »

0xRolex wrote: post #112
jackvalentine wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should they accept anything that can be exchanged for fiat without too much fuss?

I don't know, do they really check who donated fiat comes from and refuse donations when it comes from, let's say, anyone involved in anything against their values ?

Checking this may be impractical. But for crypto donations, you don't need to check - you _know_ that it was generated in an environmentally-unfriendly way (at least for the currencies currently accepted).

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#118

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

mandmandam wrote: post #73
bb88 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Honestly the reasoning is weird. Don't get me wrong, I think crypto currencies are for the most part a scam, a ponzi scheme or a a platform for pump and dumps. and > Yet the whole thing just does not make sense imo. It's one thing to be against crypto, but refusing it when you are a charity for the most asinine moral purity tests is absurd. It seems like the first paragraph you said would be enough of a reason to n…

Man, there's a baby in that bathwater Wiki RFC are throwing out. There are projects that are fair, were fairly distributed, that work and are secure, that are feeless and instant, all while being truly decentralized. Everything that Bitcoin promised to be and wasn't. So, when the scams die out the best projects willl still exist. It doesn't matter how much of their own face Wikipedia cuts off, but it's sad to see the…

> I think crypto currencies are for the most part a scam

> Man, there's a baby in that bathwater

It takes a special kind of thinking to insist "yeah, crypto currencies are about 98% scammy, but there must be good in the last 2%!, I've just seen 98 scams in a row, this _increases_ the odds that the next 2 that I see are legit!"

Well,

* no it does not increase the odds, this is desperate wishful thinking clinging to a fixed belief

* what if there is no baby, only bathwater? And where does the burden of proof that there is a baby or not, lie?

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#119

Post by ithinkso »

mardifoufs wrote: post #37

Honestly the reasoning is weird. Don't get me wrong, I think crypto currencies are for the most part a scam, a ponzi scheme or a platform for pump and dumps. Yet the whole thing just does not make sense imo. It's one thing to be against crypto, but refusing it when you are a charity for the most asinine moral purity tests is absurd. This 100% reminds me of the almost cultist like extremely negative reaction to anythi…

There was a vote, the majority (70%+) of those that voted voted to stop. I don't know why other arguments would matter
Post reply on HN