21–30 of 202 posts
We would consider companies foolish if they left sales on the table, even if they didn't immediately need it. Why would non-profits be expected to not fundraise as aggressively as possible? The expectation that non-profits should be run on fumes is silly.
Why would you expect someone joining a charity to take a huge shit on the charity’s primary mission? And expect donors to like it?
I think it’s tolerated because.. we don’t have a choice other than to tolerate it. What else are we going to do? Are we going to close the browser window and not use Wikipedia?
You can add the following rules to your uBlock Origin config: en.wikipedia.org##.cn-fundraising en.wikipedia.org##.frb-country-US.frb-rml-enabled.frb
I think it’s tolerated because.. we don’t have a choice other than to tolerate it. What else are we going to do? Are we going to close the browser window and not use Wikipedia?
This is precisely what I do. There are plenty of other ways to find useful information on the internet and of course there are dead tree books.
Lately the wikimedia foundation just comes off as the whiny entitled rich kid who's upset that their parents only bought a brand new Acura instead of a Jaguar for their birthday. I'm not going to encourage the behavior by giving it attention.
> they spend (read: waste) Really? What makes you think it's all or even mostly waste?
From a 2017 post:
> The modern Wikipedia hosts 11–12 times as many pages as it did in 2005,[20] but the WMF is spending 33 times as much on hosting,[21] has about 300 times as many employees, and is spending 1,250 times as much overall.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has...
[0] https://stats.wikimedia.org/#/all-projects/reading/total-pag...
Either Wikipedia is doing well, and they will continue asking for money to continue doing well.
Or, Wikipedia is not doing well, and they will continue asking for money to do better.
For you, if you don't like Wikipedia and/or the banners, just stop going to it if it doesn't provide any value.
Separately: the Wikipedia Foundation having too much money sounds like the kind of problem I’d prefer to have, rather than it not having enough. Even if it means they “waste” money (in your estimation), it provides financial independence in a way that’s critical for the service they provide.