[Foundation-l] LA Times article / Advertising in Wikipedia

Mon Mar 10 17:29:18 UTC 2008

People get upset at any significant change. That isn't really a good reason
to not make significant changes - the increased ability of the foundation to
raise its profile in ways that cost money will, I imagine, offset potential
lost contributors. I would sincerely hope that a considered decision made
for the benefit of the Foundation would not cause many people to quit in
frustration. After all - what good is it to make the worlds information free
and accessible for everyone, if you can only do it for 10 or so years before
the funding strategy bottoms out? It should be "permanently free and
accessible" - and that takes money.

Nathan

On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:

> Nathan wrote:
> > FYI. The discussion about advertising will never be completely closed,
> > expect it to come up again and again. Conservative advertising could
> easily
> > be managed through relatively minimal use of Google ads or another ad
> > server, particularly now that we have a professionalizing staff.
> Involving
> > contributors by asking for donations is great - relying on the continued
> > generosity of these contributors to put the foundation on a sound
> footing
> > for the long term is irresponsible.
> >
> However risking the disaffection of a significant proportion of the
> editors, or even a possible fork, is not particularly responsible either.
>
> -Mark
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>