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

181–190 of 401 posts

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

#181

Post by px43 »

namdnay wrote: post #153
throwaway290 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My theory it's a payment processor that converts to %LOCAL_CURRENCY% (if necessary, with an additional conversion through USD/EUR) at the time of purchase and thus would never refund anything in croins at original rate (am open to be proven wrong).

hmmm yes in which case calling it "paying in crypto" is a massive stretch. I can also "buy a flight ticket with a used car" if there's a dealership next to the travel agency

It's no different than buying things with a credit card and having the payment processor convert your currency to the local currency etc.

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

#182

Post by px43 »

unicornmama wrote: post #16
devoutsalsa wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There just isn't the incentive to use cryptocurrency to donate to Wikipedia. Sure there is. A lot of people have lots of value tied up in crypto, a very liquid asset. It’s also easy to send. I know nothing about wiring money to Ukraine, but I know how to donate to Ukraine organizations that accept crypto. If crypto is a small part of your revenue stream, maybe it’s because you haven’t nurtured it as a donation chan…

> I know nothing about wiring money to Ukraine You go to your bank and ask them to start a wire transfer. The recipient’s bank will provide the instructions. You can even do this entirely online.

> You go to your bank and ask them to start a wire transfer.

Haha, or, I can just click a single link from a donation page and send ETH from the wallet in my browser directly to the organization that I want to support, which I did in the case of Ukraine. No need to log in to any third party website, and the transaction was finalized in ~10 seconds with negligible fees.

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

#183

Post by throwaway290 »

px43 wrote: post #181
namdnay wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

hmmm yes in which case calling it "paying in crypto" is a massive stretch. I can also "buy a flight ticket with a used car" if there's a dealership next to the travel agency

It's no different than buying things with a credit card and having the payment processor convert your currency to the local currency etc.

Can't you just switch currency on your bank card, avoiding conversion?

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

#184

Post by tromp »

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…

Nothing in crypto is fairly distributed. Not when the majority of supply is distributed in just a few years, or, much worse yet, all at launch in the hands of the founders plus whoever they decided to handout tokens to by whatever publicly unverifiable way.

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

#185

Post by baobabKoodaa »

vaylian wrote: post #174
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #166

I always find it weird when a charity or non-profit publically announces that they stop accepting certain forms of donations due to ideological reasons. It's a signal that the organization isn't particularly starving for donations. If you were planning to donate to Wikipedia any sum less than $130,100.94, remember that 70% of Wikipedians consider such donations to have no impact at all. So if you were about to donate…

> It's a signal that the organization isn't particularly starving for donations. That's not a conclusion that came to my mind. Despite all the hype, Bitcoin is still a niche payment system and basically everyone can use a more established payment method instead.

> basically everyone can use a more established payment method instead.

Are you hypothesizing that the amount of donations will not be reduced as a result of this decision? Even the person who wrote the proposal admitted that this decision would lead to less donations. Are you suggesting 100% of people who were going to donate with crypto are now going to donate the same amounts using traditional channels?

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

#186

Post by ithinkso »

mcherm wrote: post #141
ithinkso wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Because I didn't participate in that vote, along with huge numbers of people who are similarly situated. I am a user of Wikipedia and a regular donor, but I do not follow whatever list there is of issues to be voted on. This was not a vote of Wikipedia donors, it was a vote of politically active Wikipedia authors on the subject of which donations should be accepted.

I understand that but it was not a vote for Wikipedia users nor it was a vote for Wikipedia donors. It was a vote for Wikipedia and what payment do they accept - it has no impact for you as an user, and as a donor - they made their choice how and what they want to be donated to them

It's an interesting topic in on itself, about rejecting donations. On one hand they are donations to you so you should be greatful but on the other hand, if they are from the party you're against... well, do you accept even if it helps your cause?

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

#187

Post by baobabKoodaa »

MereInterest wrote: post #180
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #166

I always find it weird when a charity or non-profit publically announces that they stop accepting certain forms of donations due to ideological reasons. It's a signal that the organization isn't particularly starving for donations. If you were planning to donate to Wikipedia any sum less than $130,100.94, remember that 70% of Wikipedians consider such donations to have no impact at all. So if you were about to donate…

I don't think there's anything weird about it. Accepting a form of payment increases demand for that form of payment. Not accepting a payment decreases the demand. In effect, wikipedia is paying the price of decreased donations to buy a decrease in the influence of cryptocurrencies. No different than spending money to advance a non-profit's goal, except that the money being "spent" is in lost potential revenue rather…

> In effect, wikipedia is paying the price of decreased donations to buy a decrease in the influence of cryptocurrencies.

Exactly! They have amassed so much money that they can afford to wage ideological crusades against things unrelated to their core mission. That's a clear signal that it's time to reduce donations to Wikipedia.

> No different than spending money to advance a non-profit's goal, except that the money being "spent" is in lost potential revenue rather than distributed actual revenue.

The difference is spending to advance Wikipedia's core mission, versus spending to advance random unrelated ventures.

> ethical companies don't do business with scammers, do not accept money from scammers.

Nope, that's not it, at all. If that were the case, they would have announced some kind of KYC initiative to identify scammers and refuse their donations. But they aren't targeting scammers specifically - scammers are still welcome to send their donations in USD, and Wikipedia will happily accept their donations. What they won't accept is donations in crypto, regardless of the origin of that donation.

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

#188

Post by AxeVice »

cycomanic wrote: post #98

I find many of the replies here fascinating. On one hand whenever there is talk about government regulating some industry or actor a large portion of commenter here reply that if you don't agree with the practice don't use them, no regulation needed. Now an organisation does exactly that, they decide that they don't want to use a "service" that they ethically disagree with, and lots of replies call it pointless virtu…

People like to be contrarian, or at least the replies a thread receives will mostly be from people who disagree with the thread's premise.

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

#190

Post by raziel2p »

logicchains wrote: post #140
missingdays wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you are 0.08%

The rights of minorities don't matter?

paying in a currency/asset of your choice is no one's right. I have a bunch of foreign currency in cash lying around which I cannot use where I live without exchanging it, I guess that makes me a minority as well - should I make a fuss about my european country of residence not accepting a central american currency?
Post reply on HN