|
So I was looking up something on Wikipedia earlier (the Neapolitan chord, if you must know... I won't tell you what it is, you know where to look) and I noticed a new addition to the normal adverts asking for donations. It said OMG! Wikipedia is gone! I'll flunk my exams!, and clicking on it led to a link asking for more money. Now, I appreciate that Wikipedia is a great thing, and very widely used, and I'm not saying people don't use Wikipedia for their exams (although I am saying they shouldn't). I know it would be a great loss to the already threatened world of public domain content if the Wikimedia foundation were unable to run Wikipedia and it must cost a lot. Think how many people use Wikipedia, not just every day, but every second. What I AM saying is that Wikipedia are taking the wrong approach. What, they don't like putting adverts on the site but they don't mind trying to guilt their users into donating? Wikimedia need to get over themselves and accept that they're going to have to earn some money. It doesn't make Wikipedia any less free if there are a few adverts on the pages, and if they would rather shut Wikipedia down than put up with that then they're missing the point.
About this poster:
Posted by:
OwenTuz
(male, mid-20s)
(Posted 11/28/07)
|