Comments on: $3 Million Donation For The Sum Of All Human Knowledge http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/ Startup and Technology News Mon, 08 Sep 2008 04:48:06 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: MS http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2057618 MS Fri, 28 Mar 2008 00:36:44 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2057618 Wikipedia can consider many alternative revenue models and I hope it will never end up showing ads because ads "are evil". Wikipedia can consider many alternative revenue models and I hope it will never end up showing ads because ads “are evil”.

]]> By: $3 Million Donation For The Sum Of All Human Knowledge http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2057382 $3 Million Donation For The Sum Of All Human Knowledge Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:05:53 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2057382 [...] $3 Million Donation For The Sum Of All Human Knowledge - Tech Crunch The Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization which operates Wikipedia, announced a $3 million donation from The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation today. The donation will be paid ratably over three years. [...] [...] $3 Million Donation For The Sum Of All Human Knowledge - Tech Crunch The Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization which operates Wikipedia, announced a $3 million donation from The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation today. The donation will be paid ratably over three years. [...]

]]> By: Rollo http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2056896 Rollo Thu, 27 Mar 2008 18:47:38 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2056896 Open, collaborative projects don't need windfalls. They need idealistic volunteers. Advertising is the fastest way to scare such people away. Come on, this is obvious stuff. Open, collaborative projects don’t need windfalls. They need idealistic volunteers. Advertising is the fastest way to scare such people away.

Come on, this is obvious stuff.

]]> By: Wikipedia riceve una donazione da 3 milioni di dollari « Marco e Massimiliano’s Weblog http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2056033 Wikipedia riceve una donazione da 3 milioni di dollari « Marco e Massimiliano’s Weblog Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:43:33 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2056033 [...] Via | TechCrunch.com [...] [...] Via | TechCrunch.com [...]

]]> By: TechCrunch Japanese アーカイブ » 人類の知識の集積のために―Wikipediaに$3Mの寄付 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2054355 TechCrunch Japanese アーカイブ » 人類の知識の集積のために―Wikipediaに$3Mの寄付 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:58:39 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2054355 [...] [原文へ] [...] [...] [原文へ] [...]

]]> By: David http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053720 David Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:22:38 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053720 What is this fascination among the posters with non-profits? As if the employees are not paid. As if it takes no money to run the company? From what I've seen in the past, non-profits are much more prone to internal corruption. There is less accountability because of their status. What is this fascination among the posters with non-profits? As if the employees are not paid. As if it takes no money to run the company?

From what I’ve seen in the past, non-profits are much more prone to internal corruption. There is less accountability because of their status.

]]> By: $3 Million to further human knowledge « TLC Studio http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053685 $3 Million to further human knowledge « TLC Studio Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:09:05 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053685 [...] This is another round of big funding, after Wikipedia received a sizable amount from donors last year. The below is a excerpt  from techcrunch. [...] [...] This is another round of big funding, after Wikipedia received a sizable amount from donors last year. The below is a excerpt  from techcrunch. [...]

]]> By: How Should Wikipedia Spend Its $3 Million? : The Drama 2.0 Show http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053658 How Should Wikipedia Spend Its $3 Million? : The Drama 2.0 Show Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:02:31 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053658 [...] seriously before making a rash decision to spend it all on a hopeless attempt to aggregate “the sum of human knowledge.” Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and [...] [...] seriously before making a rash decision to spend it all on a hopeless attempt to aggregate “the sum of human knowledge.” Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and [...]

]]> By: Will Johnston http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053656 Will Johnston Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:01:37 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053656 I'm wondering where the problem would be if they just ran Adsense/Yahoo ads and didn't allow advertisers to target the site. That way there's a disconnect between those placing the ads and those controlling the content. @17 Gonzalo has it right. Large non-profits have paid staffs. Where did we get the idea that it's wrong to pay someone to do something. Wikipedia is 99.99% volunteers already. There's nothing wrong with 15 paid employees for the 5th largest site on the Internet. I’m wondering where the problem would be if they just ran Adsense/Yahoo ads and didn’t allow advertisers to target the site. That way there’s a disconnect between those placing the ads and those controlling the content. @17 Gonzalo has it right. Large non-profits have paid staffs. Where did we get the idea that it’s wrong to pay someone to do something. Wikipedia is 99.99% volunteers already. There’s nothing wrong with 15 paid employees for the 5th largest site on the Internet.

]]> By: olin http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053480 olin Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:04:33 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053480 Would be cool if they first started by only advertising licensed/certified non profits. That would generate income, raise awareness for non profits, and profit non profits with an amazing advertising platform. Would be cool if they first started by only advertising licensed/certified non profits. That would generate income, raise awareness for non profits, and profit non profits with an amazing advertising platform.

]]> By: Muliko http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053269 Muliko Wed, 26 Mar 2008 17:02:49 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053269 @micfo: I'm wondering what the hell they're doing with 15 employees, that's way too many for an operation like Wikipedia. Besides, almost anything and everything online can be managed by volunteers. @micfo:

I’m wondering what the hell they’re doing with 15 employees, that’s way too many for an operation like Wikipedia. Besides, almost anything and everything online can be managed by volunteers.

]]> By: ModernMetrix http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053162 ModernMetrix Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:26:26 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2053162 Again, who visits Wikipedia? See for yourself: http://mmx.typepad.com/mmx/2008/03/who-uses-wikipe.html Again, who visits Wikipedia? See for yourself:

http://mmx.typepad.com/mmx/200.....ikipe.html

]]> By: micfo.com http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052553 micfo.com Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:44:20 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052553 Just wondering how wikipedia foundation manage work with just 15 employees? Just wondering how wikipedia foundation manage work with just 15 employees?

]]> By: Michael Bakovic http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052501 Michael Bakovic Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:25:41 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052501 Wow, that's really cool. I wonder if they really need all that money?... -Checkout my site for ways to earn money online. http://mikesmoneyclub.blogspot.com/ Wow, that’s really cool. I wonder if they really need all that money?…

-Checkout my site for ways to earn money online.
http://mikesmoneyclub.blogspot.com/

]]> By: Gonzalo Zavala http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052456 Gonzalo Zavala Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:09:04 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052456 Most foundations have paid staff and lots of non-profit organizations have revenues (other than donations). To have a revenue does not equal having a profit, although maybe a too large revenue could make some people greedy. You have to differentiate content from operations and make sure to never use ad money to pay a contributor. You also have to make sure that the size of the paid staff is never too large and that the salaries are market salaries so nobody "profits" from it in some other way. These are normal issues in most foundations. I think there's less conflict of interest when you have a bunch of almost anonymous computer-fed google or yahoo ads running in a small panel in the page than when you have a couple of large donors who could have real influence over the organization. Most foundations have paid staff and lots of non-profit organizations have revenues (other than donations). To have a revenue does not equal having a profit, although maybe a too large revenue could make some people greedy.
You have to differentiate content from operations and make sure to never use ad money to pay a contributor. You also have to make sure that the size of the paid staff is never too large and that the salaries are market salaries so nobody “profits” from it in some other way. These are normal issues in most foundations.
I think there’s less conflict of interest when you have a bunch of almost anonymous computer-fed google or yahoo ads running in a small panel in the page than when you have a couple of large donors who could have real influence over the organization.

]]> By: I Am Not Posting To Spam My Blog http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052409 I Am Not Posting To Spam My Blog Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:54:39 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052409 Taking ad revenue would not be a pure plus for Wikipedia. If Wikipedia started carrying ads, they would almost certainly receive less money in donations - people are less inclined to donate if they know the recipient is getting money elsewhere and therefore "needs less of it". Although there's no real reason why a not-for-profit shouldn't get its money from ads anymore than Oxfam shouldn't make a profit on second-hand books and clothes, businesses don't generally run on donations and charities don't generally run on ad revenue. They would also risk the perception, if not the reality, of being influenced by advertisers. My own view is that anyone who tries to influence their articles or others' articles by donating to Wikipedia (or buying ads) is a drooling moron, given how little top-down power the executive is actually able to wield over the content of articles, and the community's suspicion of paid interests. It would be far cheaper to simply learn how the system works and play it. But the perception is still there. In the end, I really don't see the point. Ads are a negative for readers, so if they don't need them - if the existing donation model is adequate - why carry them? Some have suggested using ads to finance a rethink of the entire structure, e.g. paying admins. Personally, since ceasing to work as an admin (I didn't leave as such, I just gradually stopped clicking the 'edit' button as other pursuits took over) I have been privately in favour of appointing some paid admins to cut a swathe through the fictional biographies etc. without worrying about the review processes. But that would be a major philosophical change and Wales et al is perfectly entitled to let the site continue as it is, with all its flaws. Particularly as theoretically, anyone with an idea on how to change Wikipedia for the better could simply take the content, make their changes and wait for the readers to switch (Wikipedia's brand power aside). Taking ad revenue would not be a pure plus for Wikipedia. If Wikipedia started carrying ads, they would almost certainly receive less money in donations - people are less inclined to donate if they know the recipient is getting money elsewhere and therefore “needs less of it”. Although there’s no real reason why a not-for-profit shouldn’t get its money from ads anymore than Oxfam shouldn’t make a profit on second-hand books and clothes, businesses don’t generally run on donations and charities don’t generally run on ad revenue.

They would also risk the perception, if not the reality, of being influenced by advertisers. My own view is that anyone who tries to influence their articles or others’ articles by donating to Wikipedia (or buying ads) is a drooling moron, given how little top-down power the executive is actually able to wield over the content of articles, and the community’s suspicion of paid interests. It would be far cheaper to simply learn how the system works and play it. But the perception is still there.

In the end, I really don’t see the point. Ads are a negative for readers, so if they don’t need them - if the existing donation model is adequate - why carry them? Some have suggested using ads to finance a rethink of the entire structure, e.g. paying admins. Personally, since ceasing to work as an admin (I didn’t leave as such, I just gradually stopped clicking the ‘edit’ button as other pursuits took over) I have been privately in favour of appointing some paid admins to cut a swathe through the fictional biographies etc. without worrying about the review processes. But that would be a major philosophical change and Wales et al is perfectly entitled to let the site continue as it is, with all its flaws. Particularly as theoretically, anyone with an idea on how to change Wikipedia for the better could simply take the content, make their changes and wait for the readers to switch (Wikipedia’s brand power aside).

]]> By: Cian http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052402 Cian Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:52:56 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052402 I for one love the fact that Wikipedia is adless, and hope it stays that way. I for one love the fact that Wikipedia is adless, and hope it stays that way.

]]> By: Lawrence http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052355 Lawrence Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:40:42 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052355 "windfall" lol, is the ideal word indeed. if a site as big as Wikipedia started posting ads... “windfall” lol, is the ideal word indeed.

if a site as big as Wikipedia started posting ads…

]]> By: Mark http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052241 Mark Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:58:33 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052241 To say that Wikipedia should run on ads is like saying churches should be sponsored by companies. Have you neotech people no shame? It should be easy for an established foundation like Wikipedia to continue receiving donations. A honor-roll type of listing for the biggest donators should be enough. Give a million, and get mentioned on the first page. That should be all. To say that Wikipedia should run on ads is like saying churches should be sponsored by companies. Have you neotech people no shame? It should be easy for an established foundation like Wikipedia to continue receiving donations. A honor-roll type of listing for the biggest donators should be enough. Give a million, and get mentioned on the first page. That should be all.

]]> By: panefsky http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052174 panefsky Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:37:30 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052174 I have written come articles in Wikipedia... I am here to claim my money! I have written come articles in Wikipedia…

I am here to claim my money!

]]> By: Blowski http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052160 Blowski Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:30:34 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052160 I agree that advertising should at least be explored. The BBC site recently started carrying ads for international access, and I haven't seen it degrade into a cesspit of vested interests (yet). Plus if the sysops were paid, it might encourage people from a wider background to help out, instead of the anally-retented little Hitlers that currently run the place. I agree that advertising should at least be explored. The BBC site recently started carrying ads for international access, and I haven’t seen it degrade into a cesspit of vested interests (yet).

Plus if the sysops were paid, it might encourage people from a wider background to help out, instead of the anally-retented little Hitlers that currently run the place.

]]> By: Steve Elbows http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052129 Steve Elbows Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:22:11 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052129 Adverts would not help the credibility of wikipedia, and may cause some contributors to ask where their cut of the ad revenue is. Adverts would not help the credibility of wikipedia, and may cause some contributors to ask where their cut of the ad revenue is.

]]> By: skidoo http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052109 skidoo Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:14:29 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052109 i think employees of wikipedia should not be paid. they all should be volunteers, just like in most foundations. and when it comes to site maintenance, it doesn't require more than one guy. the only costs left are the servers and i'm sure they could get it sponsored. 3 millions dollars operation costs for such a website sounds way over the top. again another silicon valley venture with no reasonable sense of reality. i think employees of wikipedia should not be paid. they all should be volunteers, just like in most foundations. and when it comes to site maintenance, it doesn’t require more than one guy. the only costs left are the servers and i’m sure they could get it sponsored. 3 millions dollars operation costs for such a website sounds way over the top. again another silicon valley venture with no reasonable sense of reality.

]]> By: Stefan http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052101 Stefan Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:12:08 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052101 - Ads are against the wiki spirit. - Hosting gets cheaper all the time. - Fund raising is the way to go. - Ads are against the wiki spirit.
- Hosting gets cheaper all the time.
- Fund raising is the way to go.

]]> By: Jim http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052058 Jim Wed, 26 Mar 2008 10:58:57 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/26/3-million-donation-for-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge/#comment-2052058 What if we discover that everything we know is wrong? Is there a refund? What if we discover that everything we know is wrong? Is there a refund?

]]>