Wikipedia Kicks Off 10th Annual Beg-a-thon

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Wikipedia is once again asking for donations to keep the site running. Here's what I do when confronted with panhandling...I say "I'll give you $3 if you don't tell me your sad story." I feel better, they get $3 and my day isn't ruined. ;)

DEAR WIKIPEDIA READERS: We are the small non-profit that runs the #5 website in the world. We have only 175 staff but serve 500 million users, and have costs like any other top site: servers, power, programs, and staff. To protect our independence, we'll never run ads. We take no government funds. We survive on donations averaging about $15. Now is the time we ask. If everyone reading this gave $3, our fundraiser would be done within an hour. Wikipedia is something special. It is like a library or a public park. It is like a temple for the mind, a place we can all go to think and learn. If Wikipedia is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online and ad-free another year. Please help us forget fundraising and get back to Wikipedia. Thank you.
Click to expand...
 
Honestly, I wouldn't be all that offended by see the occasional google ad here and there when browsing if it meant we wouldn't be asked for donations frequently. If they took that top banner and replaced it with two google search boxes on the left/right, I wonder if that too with 500 million users might generate the equivalent of $3.00 per daily user.
 
I'll give them three dollars right after they remove all pictures of Jimmy Wales from the internet.
 
That is it. There are ways to generate revenue without becoming offensive like some of the websites for our local TV stations which have ads plastered on all 4 sides and corners. Something simple and tasteful has the potential to generate a lot of revenue.
 
I'm okay with them asking for money since advertising isn't part of their principles. I've donated before as I find Wikipedia to be useful to me.
 
Its one of the most, if not the most, important, sites on the web. And they run it with fierce principles. There are countless billionaires and millionaires with more money than they can spend in 100 lives. Surely some of are tech savvy as well as not greedy bastards, and have a decent heart?

I just don't understand why more money is not donated to worthy causes. It just goes to show most rich people in fact are selfish a-holes and do as much as they can not to help anyone else.
 
I would donate if they didn't have that stupid "Not relevant" rule that decides what can and can't be included in their internet database that defeats the ENTIRE POINT of have an OPEN community based focus. What's relevant to one person may not be revelant to someone else, and having certain people deciding one way or another defeats the point.
 
Sorry, I already put several hundred dollars into Star Citizen instead, no money left for Wikipedia, because a game is more important than running a world-wide resource.
 
MrCrispy said:
Its one of the most, if not the most, important, sites on the web. And they run it with fierce principles. There are countless billionaires and millionaires with more money than they can spend in 100 lives. Surely some of are tech savvy as well as not greedy bastards, and have a decent heart?

I just don't understand why more money is not donated to worthy causes. It just goes to show most rich people in fact are selfish a-holes and do as much as they can not to help anyone else.
Click to expand...

those people got rich off stupid people and want to keep them stupid?
 
MrCrispy said:
I just don't understand why more money is not donated to worthy causes. It just goes to show most rich people in fact are selfish a-holes and do as much as they can not to help anyone else.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you're drawing this conclusion from. The fact that Wikipedia needs money? I guess Wikipedia's begging is a barometer for all the world's charity needs. :rolleyes:
 
I donated three bucks a few weeks ago (I think this beg-a-thon has been going on for a while now). I remember we had a complete set of Encyclopedia Britannica when I was growing up; I think someone gave it to my dad as payment for some work he did, and I think at the time a complete set ran a good thousand bucks.

I love having wikipedia as a resource. The only thing I hate about it is people on the internet who have "PhD's in wikipedia," and think they know everything about everything just because they've come across a few hot words in a wiki article.
 
teh_chem said:
I donated three bucks a few weeks ago (I think this beg-a-thon has been going on for a while now). I remember we had a complete set of Encyclopedia Britannica when I was growing up; I think someone gave it to my dad as payment for some work he did, and I think at the time a complete set ran a good thousand bucks.

I love having wikipedia as a resource. The only thing I hate about it is people on the internet who have "PhD's in wikipedia," and think they know everything about everything just because they've come across a few hot words in a wiki article.
Click to expand...

I support wikipedia as well. It has broadened my horizen.
 
It would be awesome if there was a virus like cancer and would only infect greedy rich people.
 
sliverjazz said:
It would be awesome if there was a virus like cancer and would only infect greedy rich people.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Then the only people left would be non-rich, non-greedy people.

And the unemployment rate will be around 95%, and worldwide philanthropy will drop like a rock.
 
people who hate rich people will never be rich . I admire the ones who got that way ethically.

some people got rich being corrupt, but most people who became rich didn't do it by being greedy, they got that way from being generous.

Everyone here has looked up something on wikipedia. It's obviously got value to most people, despite whatever shortcomings you can think of, yet people whine and complain about asking for a few bucks when they spend more than that on a value meal at mcdonalds. Put ads on it, and people would whine about ads. The "fact is", "most" people in general are cheap and want something for free AND with no ads. Then they rationalize their cheapness by coming up with some fault with the site.

"let the rich people pay for it" seems to be the usual mentality, and I am sure plenty of rich people have donated ... oh lookey here, a page on wikipedia for people who have donated shitloads of money.

https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors


So next time you want to look something up on the internet, dont. Put $3.50 / gal gas in your vehicle, and take your cheap ass to the library. Don't forget that mocha bocha latte for $6 on the way there and a $7 "combo" meal at the drive through heart attack of your choice.
 
When I google something half the time the first entry is a wiki link. It is highly useful in my life so I gladly donated.
 
Everytime I go to newegg from this site I get the in your face "please go to amazon instead so we can make a commission". And there is ads on this site. And there is a paid portion of the forum. I don't care, doesn't bother me a bit. I love this site. I hope Kyle and crew are rolling in dough. I guess if I wanted to be a dick, I could call it a year around beg a thon, but I realize there is a lot of time and effort goes into this site, and people have to make a living. It's for these reasons that I think what wikipedia is doing is no different, and makes me start thinking about pots kettles. People who don't like to pay for stuff, and don't like ads either, really need to think about why they feel they deserve something for nothing , that's called "entitlement" mentality.
 
Bob Hope once said, "If you haven't got any charity in your heart, you have the worst kind of heart trouble.”
 
choppedliver said:
People who don't like to pay for stuff, and don't like ads either, really need to think about why they feel they deserve something for nothing , that's called "entitlement" mentality.
Click to expand...

Some people simply want something for nothing. Mr. Wales is both an asshole and an idiot. While I value Wikipedia, I think there are certainly other people out there who could run it better, for less, and without the drama he brings along where he goes. I donate during every beg-a-thon with the explicit message of "F**k Jimmy". I pay because the service holds a good value to me where it is worth donating however I greatly despise the shills who run it.
 
they stole the $3 line from Mozilla (who now uses it for their own begging when you start Firefox)
 
shade91 said:
Some people simply want something for nothing. Mr. Wales is both an asshole and an idiot. While I value Wikipedia, I think there are certainly other people out there who could run it better, for less, and without the drama he brings along where he goes. I donate during every beg-a-thon with the explicit message of "F**k Jimmy". I pay because the service holds a good value to me where it is worth donating however I greatly despise the shills who run it.
Click to expand...

agreed. I donated this morning , regardless of my views of certain people in the organization. I couldn't even begin to estimate the number of times I googled something, and the first link was wikipedia, and when I clicked on it, it wasn't bogged down by javascript ads, flash ads, ad gifs/jpgs, annoying "cover the screen until you click here crap".
 
just paid my dues.. it's the most helpful site on the internet

Whether I want to know real historical info on a character in a historical fiction book I just read or the property differences between 7075 and 6050 aluminum alloys in my bike, tent poles and trekking poles.

Wikipedia fulfills a dream we all had when the Internet was first born; that it would be used to advance mankind.

You can run whole schools with the information there; in fact a lot of the world does.

Its to a point I can't imagine an internet without them. Can you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top