Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It doesn't go away very long. I press the X and I still find myself having to press it again fairly often.

I'm probably not a good benchmark but personally I find Jimmy Wales really smug and annoying. This is due to my experience as an active WP editor back in the day. I hate the false sense of urgency that this campaign is pushing.

I'm not "outraged" by any means and haven't stopped using Wikimedia sites, but it is definitely asinine and repetitive. How long has this "urgent" fund drive been going on now? Are they just going to keep it until they hit their stated goal?

Wikipedia should find a way to become more useful, there's no need for all this crap. I wouldn't have any problem at all if WP just implemented an advanced history or page stats viewer and charged people $10/year to use it. Then they could stop with these humongous, recurring banners, the constant begging, and Jimmy Wales could quit pretending to be the saint that he definitely isn't.



> Wikipedia should find a way to become more useful

I find wikipedia very useful in its current form.


Me too, useful was the wrong word. I probably should have said "self-sufficient".


That doesn't make any sense either. Do you think Linux should find a way to be more self-sufficient? Either it's a community endeavor (and requires community support) or it is not Wikipedia.


Linux is a rather different deal than Wikipedia. When you see Linus running fundraisers for 3-4 months until ten or twenty million dollars is donated, then I will probably think that Linus and Linux need to become more self-sufficient.

The content and the hosting can be separated, as they are with Linux and many other open-source projects; Linus controls Linux, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he also controls kernel.org or any of the other places where it may appear. The authors of projects on Google Code control their projects even though Google provides the hosting -- individuals can still create content without centralized authority. If Wikipedia performed more experiments in this space, they may not need $20 million every year to continue operation.

That's a pretty hefty investment for something that doesn't make any money. Even non-profit or public endeavors are expected to operate in a generally self-sustaining way so that they don't become a burden and so that reasonable control isn't taken away from the endeavor's controllers.

Wikipedia could be developed independently of the Wikimedia Foundation. I don't think Wales et al have done a really spectacular job running things as it stands anyway.

The content is produced by the community. This fundraiser is not to pay people to produce content, but to pay for hosting and other costs associated with running a live instance of the Wikipedia content.


Why should Wikipedia's goal be to provide something different that's cheaper? Why is it wrong for them to need money?


They can provide the same thing if they can work it out. It's not wrong to need money per se; as noted above, I am not outraged about this and I don't get the sense that the idea of a Wikimedia fundraiser is immoral.

It is just annoying that the fundraiser has continued for so long and that the practices have been disruptive to the perusal of Wikimedia content for some time now. I am aware that Wikimedia wants my donation; I do not want to give it to them because I don't trust the Wikimedia Foundation to make very good use of it, and I don't like several of the policies they have promulgated and installed on Wikipedia.

I think it would be better for everyone if Wikimedia found a way to become self-sufficient because then: a) nobody would have to be bothered by huge donation banners for months on end; b) Wikimedia would have more consistent and improved cash flow, which ultimately translates into greater flexibility; c) Wikimedia would not be beholden to random subsets of people for its continued operation (they could focus on the subsets that specifically generate revenue and improve their revenue-generating functionality) and would not need to dedicate large amounts of effort to a sustained months-long fundraising effort. And so on.

So, I'm not casting moral judgment here. I just think it would be better for everyone if WM tried to do something less annoying and more focused to sustain its finances.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: