Perhaps you're philosophically opposed to any form of censorship and think this is a daft point. Can you be sure that your shareholders, your customers, and the members of your local school board feel the same way? Wikipedia contains graphic material that might be morally contemptible in many countries -- even in the West. This includes images and articles depicting nipple piercings, anilingus, labia piercings, child pornography erotica, various forms of piercing the penis, strappado bondage, erotic spanking, incest pornography, smotherboxes, and Courtney Cummz and her directorial debut 'Face Invaders'. (For more examples of Wikipedia trash, see Worst of Wikipedia.)
There's only one reason not to donate to wikipedia: the guilt-trip-inducing message on the top of every fucking wikipedia page during donation drive.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-20 16:47
If you feel guilty about not helping Wikipedia, why don't you make a donation?
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-20 16:52
>>10
I don't feel guilty, but the fact that they try to guilt people into donating puts me off. I wish they would slap a bunch of adds around every article already and quit this nagging bullshit.
Please send a donation to aid the ongoing and badly needed disaster relief in Haiti. Or Tahiti, if you're dyslectic. Oh, and children in Uganda, I guess.
>>17
Yeah, that's the only one I didn't agree with. They are *only* talking about nudity for educational purposes, which is a really silly 1950's viewpoint in my opinion. I bet these are the same people who pull their kids out of sex ed classes. It de-values the rest of the otherwise good article.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-20 21:23
You know, the great thing about Wikipedia is that "it's the encyclopedia anyone can edit." But unfortunately, the downside is, it's the encyclopedia anyone can edit.
(pause for laugher)
But seriously, computer science is a terrible name for...
could easily operate on a budget of $1.6 million
Stopped reading there. Linking to a Yahoo Answers where the only source is yourself? He could learn a bit from WP:SOURCE.
There are a lot of very valid reasons not to donate to Jumbo Welas' pandemonium, but that article does a disservice to them. As pointed before, point 8 is pure garbage.
But yeah, less than 25% is spent on actual machines and bandwidth. Less than another quarter is spent on the salaries of computer technicians, which is arguable for an "all-volunteer" thing but still not too bad.
The rest is spent on useless stuff, from management people to travel expenses (read: Jimbo's stays on luxury suites around the world).
How did this year's donation campaign end anyway? I hope they didn't meet their targets.