[Foundation-l] Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form NewPartnership

Tue Oct 25 08:13:25 UTC 2005

On 24/10/05, Dori <slowpoke at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/24/05, Dan Grey <dangrey at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Surely there's only a handful of logical conclusions here:
> >
> > 1. We stay with just donations (small private and few large coporate
> > ones) and the site slowly bogs down as traffic demand outstrips server
> > supply
> > 2. We try more small stuff like the Amazon and the forthcoming 1-Click
> > experiments, but let's be honest unless WP is plastered in them
> > they'll never make much of a difference
> > 3. We eventually accept a small amount of Adsense (or Adsense-syle)
> > advertising on the site, which will most likely pay for what we need.
>
> Obviously you're highlighting 3 there, and the obvious corollary to
> all three is that a bunch of editors and readers will pack their bags
> and leave. If the stacks of money is better than editors and readers,
> then the foundations should go for it. And don't for a second think
> that it will be one or two, many people are opposed to this, and a
> tidy sum have already left just because of the *possibility*.

There are hundreds - probably thousands - of editors active every day.
If a few choose to flounce off - as is so fashionable on WP - then sod
them! Most of them will slowly crawl back anyway.

If the choice is between a site with (Adsense) adverts, and no site at
all (which is the choice it *WILL* come down to), then I'd rather have
a site!

Plus with a few mill coming in a year, we'd actually be able to get a
lot closer to the goal of distributing knowledge to everyone, not
least as Wikimedia would be able to afford to PAY people to make these
dreams happen .

Dan