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

Ask HN: Why is the Wikipedia Foundation's begging tolerated?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 202 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why is the Wikipedia Foundation's begging tolerated?

#151

Post by samtho »

constantcrying wrote: post #84
samtho wrote: post #48

I’ve worked a lot with nonprofits. Having a pool of static funds available is not indicative of sustainability. If you are asking for funds only when you are running out, it is far too late for you.

If they cared about long term sustainability they wouldn't use that money to fund a web of charities. If they were expecting hardships in the distant future you would obviously expect them to cut down on unnecessary spending to focus on keeping the website up and running. Is that happening?

Part of being a nonprofit is that instead of being obligated to drive profits to investors, you must carry out the focus of your mission statement.

Money is fuel. It should not ever become such a constraining resource and saying they can get by with less is trivializing the way they conduct operations and the impact the are obligated to peruse.

I don’t see this argument being made as it relates to for-profit companies. Is a nonprofit unworthy of fundraising because they have “enough” already? Who defines that? Are they not worthy because they bring value to society rather than individual shareholders? Nonprofits still operate as businesses and they also want to see growth. I’m not sure how any reasonable person would see a problem with that.

Re: Ask HN: Why is the Wikipedia Foundation's begging tolerated?

#152

Post by 20after4 »

selfmodruntime wrote: post #106
flipbrad wrote: post #60

The Foundation is my client, but these views are only my own: This is not to say there's no excess, or that resources couldn't be allocated internally more effectively - I'm not going to put up some kind of strawman - but: 1. I took a 20% pay cut so that I could do more work for the Foundation. Worth it. 2. Posts that say "Wikipedia only has [x] more articles but budget has gone up [y]" are beyond stupid. Any idea ho…

All that but I have yet to get what the foundation spends 155 MILLION dollars on - each year. Even with your arguments that number seems to be wildly inflated. Also, the Wikimedia Foundation explicitly asks for funding for Wikipedia. As far as I know, no one asked the Wikimedia Foundation to perform anything past that. This seems to be comparable to Mozilla‘s situation, who try to grow past Firefox with ideas nobody…

Last time I checked, just a couple of years ago, Wikimedia's CEO makes ~$350k / year which seems extremely reasonable compared to most CEOs in the USA. It was ~2.5x my salary when I worked at the foundation. Typical CEO salary multipliers (as compared to typical staff salary) are far far greater in the USA.

From my experience, and I worked there for 7 years, Wikimedia pays below average for the industry, though the benefit package is absolutely top-notch.

Re: Ask HN: Why is the Wikipedia Foundation's begging tolerated?

#154

Post by diggernet »

flipbrad wrote: post #60

The Foundation is my client, but these views are only my own: This is not to say there's no excess, or that resources couldn't be allocated internally more effectively - I'm not going to put up some kind of strawman - but: 1. I took a 20% pay cut so that I could do more work for the Foundation. Worth it. 2. Posts that say "Wikipedia only has [x] more articles but budget has gone up [y]" are beyond stupid. Any idea ho…

> the drafting and design of the banners is much softer this year than the last

Doubtful. But even if true, they are still ridiculous. I load a page and start reading. Suddenly the text I am reading is replaced by that huge begging message that takes up basically my entire screen. So I scroll down (sorry, Jimmy "Please don't scroll past this" Wales) and find my place again. As I scroll down, hey presto, the beg screen is replaced with a beg footer.

As for all those other projects... Give people a choice between donating "for Wikipedia operating expenses only" or "for all Foundation projects". Let people decide which they personally value more. I bet Wikipedia gets so much money you can set up a trust and never beg again, while those other projects stay budget-limited. But you don't do that, instead using misleading language like "reflect on the number of times you visited Wikipedia this year, the value you got from it, and whether you're able to give $2 back" to fund non-Wikipedia projects. Just stop it.

Re: Ask HN: Why is the Wikipedia Foundation's begging tolerated?

#155

Post by constantcrying »

samtho wrote: post #151
constantcrying wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they cared about long term sustainability they wouldn't use that money to fund a web of charities. If they were expecting hardships in the distant future you would obviously expect them to cut down on unnecessary spending to focus on keeping the website up and running. Is that happening?

Part of being a nonprofit is that instead of being obligated to drive profits to investors, you must carry out the focus of your mission statement. Money is fuel. It should not ever become such a constraining resource and saying they can get by with less is trivializing the way they conduct operations and the impact the are obligated to peruse. I don’t see this argument being made as it relates to for-profit companie…

Why do you pretend that I am arguing they are not allowed to ask for money?

My problem is that they lie about the state of their organization and use that money for things totally unrelated to what their mission should be.

I really do not care that they have 250 Million in assets, but I do care that they are still using alarmist "Wikipedia is about to die" messaging to raise funds and then use that money to fund unrelated and undisclosed charities. I am asking for honesty and accountability.

Re: Ask HN: Why is the Wikipedia Foundation's begging tolerated?

#156

Post by ravenstine »

constantcrying wrote: post #123
95014_refugee wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? That's literally the pretext for any charity.

>Why? Because it is a complete and utter lie. The Wikimedia foundation is extremely wealthy and under no financial stress. They Have hundreds of millions in assets[0]. A charity should be honest and open about what they are doing with the money they are taking. Wikimedia foundation isn't and is fundraising as if they were about to go under. [0] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/2/26/Wikim...

Even if they were totally open about it, they would almost certainly use that same tactic. I once worked in public media, at a 501 (c) 3, and they too would pull the "everything stops if not enough people donate" scheme. And I believed it, that is until I learned that they were flush with cash and made the majority of their revenue from super wealthy people looking for a tax break. Something tells me this isn't uncommon, because it's a legal and effective grift.

It's not the donations that are the problem, but the pure bullshit narrative to fleece people a few times every year.

Re: Ask HN: Why is the Wikipedia Foundation's begging tolerated?

#157

Post by constantcrying »

JoeyBananas wrote: post #146
constantcrying wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>why shouldn't they? Because they are doing so under the false pretenses of urgency and desperation, when they are very well off.

If they have more money than they need, it is natural to expand the scope of the mission. You could argue that they are doing a poor job at this, but I don't see any case that they shouldn't be continuing to collect more donations. It's better to have the money and waste it than not have the money and not waste it.

I am asking for honesty and accountability.

If you are going to use that money to give it to random undisclosed charities advertise that. Have the pop-up say "The Wikimedia foundations desperately needs your donations, so that we finally can give your money to undisclosed charities.", don't pretend like Wikipedia is about to die, the organization is extremely well off and you should be honest about that.

>It's better to have the money and waste it than not have the money and not waste it.

That is such an awful thing to say. They are still taking the money of people who believe they are keeping Wikipedia alive, but then use that exact money to give to undisclosed charities. How can you not see that as a problem?

Re: Ask HN: Why is the Wikipedia Foundation's begging tolerated?

#158

Post by constantcrying »

ravenstine wrote: post #156
constantcrying wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why? Because it is a complete and utter lie. The Wikimedia foundation is extremely wealthy and under no financial stress. They Have hundreds of millions in assets[0]. A charity should be honest and open about what they are doing with the money they are taking. Wikimedia foundation isn't and is fundraising as if they were about to go under. [0] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/2/26/Wikim...

Even if they were totally open about it, they would almost certainly use that same tactic. I once worked in public media, at a 501 (c) 3, and they too would pull the "everything stops if not enough people donate" scheme. And I believed it, that is until I learned that they were flush with cash and made the majority of their revenue from super wealthy people looking for a tax break. Something tells me this isn't uncom…

>It's not the donations that are the problem, but the pure bullshit narrative to fleece people a few times every year.

Exactly. Their message is alarmist, as if they couldn't stay afloat. Most people believe it, I certainly did. And it seems reasonable, it is a gigantic and totally add free site, how could they not be facing financial troubles? But they aren't and if they want to fund vanity projects, they should advertise that they are doing exactly that.

Re: Ask HN: Why is the Wikipedia Foundation's begging tolerated?

#159

Post by falcolas »

shp0ngle wrote: post #87
Nomentatus wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was okay 'till I donated and got thoroughly spammed by them after that. Not okay with donating there now.

That happens if you donate to ANY cause, ever. If you give money to, I don’t know, a charity for hungry kids in , they will send you MORE begging mails, not less.

And this makes it OK? The status quo’s brokenness is not an excuse for acting like an ass.

Re: Ask HN: Why is the Wikipedia Foundation's begging tolerated?

#160

Post by punyearthling »

Arrath wrote: post #133
shp0ngle wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That happens if you donate to ANY cause, ever. If you give money to, I don’t know, a charity for hungry kids in , they will send you MORE begging mails, not less.

Serious. I found donating blood to have been a bit of a mistake, the bastards just won't stop calling asking for more.

To be fair, you donated to Dr. Acula.
Post reply on HN