Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ The Wikimedia Foundation _ 2011 appeals for money

Posted by: thekohser

I see that the https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=L11_1014_Rob/en/US&utm_source=B_1014_Rob_pointing_US is an attempt to appeal to wankers by illustrating the thoughts of a jagoff.

No mention of the fact that 53 cents of every donated dollar will go to things other than the Foundation's mission-fulfilling program services.

Posted by: dogbiscuit

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 14th October 2011, 3:37pm) *

I see that the https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=L11_1014_Rob/en/US&utm_source=B_1014_Rob_pointing_US is an attempt to appeal to wankers by illustrating the thoughts of a jagoff.

No mention of the fact that 53 cents of every donated dollar will go to things other than the Foundation's mission-fulfilling program services.


QUOTE

Where your donation goes
Technology: Servers, bandwidth, maintenance, development. Wikipedia is the #5 website in the world, and it runs on a fraction of what other top websites spend
People: The other top 10 websites have thousands of employees. We have fewer than 100, making your donation a great investment in a highly-efficient not-for-profit organization

Fraudulent misrepresentation? In the UK, to make an misleading statement with the intent to obtain money is a criminal offence.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Fri 14th October 2011, 10:47am) *

QUOTE

...it runs on a fraction of what other top websites spend
People: The other top 10 websites have thousands of employees. We have fewer than 100...

Fraudulent misrepresentation? In the UK, to make an misleading statement with the intent to obtain money is a criminal offence.


"Other" top 10 websites also generate tens of millions, hundreds of millions, or billions of dollars for shareholders each year. The Wikimedia Foundation generates a few million dollars to pay this lucky staff that largely sits back while volunteers do most of the work that brings Wikipedia its value.

Here is a similar and factual statement:

Wikipedia Review has one part-time owner-employee. Its website runs on $480 per year. The site serves over 30,000 unique visitors every month. Valero has 20,000 employees. It spends over $250 million per month to operate. Yet, its Valero.com website receives far fewer visitors than does Wikipedia Review.com. Therefore, https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_flow&SESSION=314Kxu5YQcK6A9ZPG4BjehDiFGKFr6T4qDjR5Hgukt04vwMqVJ987HT4szG&dispatch=5885d80a13c0db1f8e263663d3faee8db2b24f7b84f1819390b7e2d9283d70f1 is a great investment in a highly-efficient for-profit organization.

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 14th October 2011, 11:51am) *

"Other" top 10 websites also generate tens of millions, hundreds of millions, or billions of dollars for shareholders each year. The Wikimedia Foundation generates a few million dollars to pay this lucky staff that largely sits back while volunteers do most of the work that brings Wikipedia its value.

Insane and idiotic volunteers. Some of whom use bots to generate fake "content".....

Posted by: melloden

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 14th October 2011, 6:51pm) *

QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Fri 14th October 2011, 10:47am) *

QUOTE

...it runs on a fraction of what other top websites spend
People: The other top 10 websites have thousands of employees. We have fewer than 100...

Fraudulent misrepresentation? In the UK, to make an misleading statement with the intent to obtain money is a criminal offence.


"Other" top 10 websites also generate tens of millions, hundreds of millions, or billions of dollars for shareholders each year. The Wikimedia Foundation generates a few million dollars to pay this lucky staff that largely sits back while volunteers do most of the work that brings Wikipedia its value.

Here is a similar and factual statement:

Wikipedia Review has one part-time owner-employee. Its website runs on $480 per year. The site serves over 30,000 unique visitors every month. Valero has 20,000 employees. It spends over $250 million per month to operate. Yet, its Valero.com website receives far fewer visitors than does Wikipedia Review.com. Therefore, https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_flow&SESSION=314Kxu5YQcK6A9ZPG4BjehDiFGKFr6T4qDjR5Hgukt04vwMqVJ987HT4szG&dispatch=5885d80a13c0db1f8e263663d3faee8db2b24f7b84f1819390b7e2d9283d70f1 is a great investment in a highly-efficient for-profit organization.

Except one would argue that Valero achieves more than your website does, because Valero is not primarily a web-based company. Efficiency isn't everything.

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 14th October 2011, 2:37pm) *

I see that the https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=L11_1014_Rob/en/US&utm_source=B_1014_Rob_pointing_US is an attempt to appeal to wankers by illustrating the thoughts of a jagoff.

No mention of the fact that 53 cents of every donated dollar will go to things other than the Foundation's mission-fulfilling program services.


https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=L11_1014_Rob/en/US&utm_source=B_1014_Rob_pointing_US is actually quite disgusting.To me it just does not sound right. I am surprised it was allowed at all. dry.gif
QUOTE
Wikipedia’s corporate office is located in Jimmy Wales’ basement, right next to an over-sized water heater. They keep one of the most important ventures in the world running every day and night, besides Thursdays, because that’s when Jimmy’s roommate, Big Mike, has poker night.

Okay, that’s an exaggeration, but not a huge one. Wikipedia is an impossibly small operation performing an impossibly large job.

Did you know that fewer people work at Wikipedia than Google has at their Saint-Ghislain data center alone?


What Google and its employees have to do with Wikipedia? Google does not ask for the donations, Google provides employment for thousands.


BTW could you please tell me, where this data comes from, I mean this 53 cents number.
Also do we know how much money WMF employees make. How much money are spent to pay they travel expenses. I mean we know that Steve Jobs was making $1 per year, what about WMF employees.

Posted by: Looch

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sat 15th October 2011, 10:06pm) *
could you please tell me, where this data comes from, I mean this 53 cents number.


Seconded. I'm not saying I don't believe it. I'm just wondering where it comes from.

Posted by: powercorrupts

I'm not happy with them asking for £2/3/5/10-plus bank card monlthly Direct Debits, especially as the 'default' setting, while you are asked to a box to make the "one off donation". Charities essentially compete for people's DD money in the UK (they all ask for a few quid a month - and of course most of those who do it will only do one or two), and it really feels like the WMF are competing for our money now. How are they a bloody charity other than as a tax loophole? It's just so dodgy.

Incidentally I haven't seen any banner ads this year, at least in the UK. I know they had criticism last year for over-exposing his alpha 'look at me' face, but Wales has spun that around as him being told by his staff that they make more money when his image is up there (ie they talked him into doing it). If his face really is the reason for increased donating (and it doesn't necessarily follow that it is) - it is scary in many ways of course.

Posted by: thekohser

Just thought I'd point out that (as of this morning), more than once every 3 minutes (on average) someone new is visiting the "http://wikipediareview.com/Top_10_Reasons_Not_to_Donate_to_Wikipedia" page.

They're coming from Germany, the Czech Republic, India, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Australia, the United States, and Pakistan -- and that's just a sample of the most recent 20 visitors.

They're searching Google for things like:


With this much traffic and search engine exposure, do we think it would be worth improving on the landing page? How so?

Posted by: Peter Damian

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 16th November 2011, 7:46pm) *

Just thought I'd point out that (as of this morning), more than once every 3 minutes (on average) someone new is visiting the "http://wikipediareview.com/Top_10_Reasons_Not_to_Donate_to_Wikipedia" page.

They're coming from Germany, the Czech Republic, India, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Australia, the United States, and Pakistan -- and that's just a sample of the most recent 20 visitors.

They're searching Google for things like:
  • is it correct to donate money for wikipedia? (http://www.google.co.in/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=is%20it%20correct%20to%20donate%20money%20for%20wikipedia%3F, #5 result)
  • wikipedia donation statistics (https://www.google.com/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=wikipedia%20donation%20statistics, #2 result)
  • donating to wikipedia (http://www.google.co.uk/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=donating%20to%20wikipedia, #7 result)
  • how much money did wikipedia received from donations (https://www.google.com/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=how%20much%20money%20did%20wikipedia%20received%20from%20donations, #4 result)
  • how many people donate to wikipedia (http://www.google.se/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=how%20many%20people%20donate%20to%20wikipedia, #1 result)
  • donations to wikipedia (http://www.google.com.sg/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=donations%20to%20wikipedia, #2 result)
With this much traffic and search engine exposure, do we think it would be worth improving on the landing page? How so?


Yes I notice if you google 'donate to Wikipedia' or similar, that page and a number of other 'anti' pages come up. I'll try a few linking experiments this weekend.


QUOTE

With this much traffic and search engine exposure, do we think it would be worth improving on the landing page? How so?


I read it again and some of it (particularly the stuff lower down, e.g. the picture of the magician holding the tied up girl) is a bit strident. At least to my conservative English tastes. We have argued about this before, I know.

QUOTE

This page is viewed by 25 different people per hour, on average, during the Wikimedia Foundation fundraising season. Thanks to excellent search engine rankings for the page, it is hoped that at least some of the readers who visit will be dissuaded from adding their donation to the Wikimedia money machine.


Why do people who have landed on this page need to know that 24 other people have landed that hour? 'The Wikipedia money machine' is crass and over the top.

QUOTE

Wikimedia Foundation finances are suspect


That whole section is great. However, you are not hitting those who are landing on the page with the key point that 'wikipedia' (P) is different from wikimedia' (M). Might be worth pointing that out. Also, there are many people on the net who are inherently suspicious of phishing sites which exploit naming ambiguities. Simply pointing out that the two enterprises are different will engage that suspicion.

QUOTE

Wikipedia has too much power.


That's a good point, may be lost on the general populace. Needs an example or a word picture.

QUOTE

Your donation will indirectly fund Wikia, Inc., which is not a charity.


The section makes a good point, but somewhat wordy. From then on, it's just too many words. I would suggest shortening it and addressing the key points.

This page is an important weapon in the armoury. Too good to be wasted. Well done.




Posted by: EricBarbour

I would tend to agree with Peter, that page is valuable, and the easier it is to read and understand,
the more impact it will have. I'd be happy to provide some quotes if you wish.

Posted by: thekohser

The "10 Reasons Not" page is now up to 50 unique visitors per hour, which is about double yesterday's traffic.

I see that some of it is due to http://www.reddit.com/user/slickshark. Upvote time!

Posted by: thekohser

I wonder if the Wikimedia Foundation ever considered keeping the appeals http://wikipediareview.com/images/1/16/Jimbo%27s_appeal_for_ED_support.jpg, or would that be the dreaded censorship?

Posted by: mbz1

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Fundraising_for_the_democrats_or_for_Wikipedia.3F

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Thu 17th November 2011, 1:51pm) *

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Fundraising_for_the_democrats_or_for_Wikipedia.3F


Somebody's on the fast track to Bannsville:

QUOTE
Jorm, you are traveling to India? May I please ask you, who pays for your travel expenses, and how necessarily it is to travel to India versus having a conference via internet communications?
One more question. In your appeal for donations you have never mentioned thousands upon thousands of volunteers, who make wikipedia possible. Why? Thanks.--Mbz1 19:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 17th November 2011, 7:54pm) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Thu 17th November 2011, 1:51pm) *

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Fundraising_for_the_democrats_or_for_Wikipedia.3F


Somebody's on the fast track to Bannsville:

QUOTE
Jorm, you are traveling to India? May I please ask you, who pays for your travel expenses, and how necessarily it is to travel to India versus having a conference via internet communications?
One more question. In your appeal for donations you have never mentioned thousands upon thousands of volunteers, who make wikipedia possible. Why? Thanks.--Mbz1 19:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


Not yet banned, but got a http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&action=historysubmit&diff=3084740&oldid=3084738 hrmph.gif from WMF employee:
QUOTE
Mbz1, I can't begin to relate to why you would make this kind of absurd insinuation. Or why you would feel it's OK to do so from behind a veil of anonymity. I also can't imagine what would make you voluntarily request that your account be blocked from editing Wikipedia, and yet return to Meta to stir shit up about Wikipedia.
Maybe there are good reasons for all of that, but you know what? I don't care. I can't imagine I'm the only one who feels like that. -Pete F 03:46, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


One is left to wonder, if this guy realizes that his response to my so called "absurd insinuation" stirs shit up about Wikipedia" ten times more that all my questions combined. confused.gif

I was also going to ask who's going to pay for http://pages.citebite.com/j1k2g3b4p9gxu, but now I believe I am going to miss on this one. biggrin.gif
In any case WMF would probably save some money, if this third marriage of Jimbo would be the happy last one. smile.gif

Posted by: Alison

http://theoatmeal.com/blog/jimmy_wales, from The Oatmeal blink.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(Alison @ Thu 17th November 2011, 9:21pm) *
http://theoatmeal.com/blog/jimmy_wales, from The Oatmeal blink.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

There was a similar thread on /b/ the other day.

All this adds up to one thing: Wikipedia isn't as "magical" as it used to be. The more they beg
pathetically for donations, the more people dislike them--and Wales.

Posted by: bambi

More crowdsourcing: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/18/wikipedia_appeal/

Posted by: EricBarbour

In case you missed it: Sergey Brin and wife
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/11/google-co-founder-sergey-brin-donates-500000-toward-wikipedias-28m-budget.ars

(Read the comments below that story. Seems to be typical nowadays.)

Posted by: Peter Damian

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sat 19th November 2011, 5:53am) *

(Read the comments below that story. Seems to be typical nowadays.)


I read your comment and thought the worst - it will be the usual fawning crap about bringing knowledge to all of humanity, vomit. But it wasn't. People are actually wondering why it costs that much to run a bunch of servers.

Posted by: thekohser

Wow, what an excellent comment:

QUOTE
If that's half for staff and half for servers, it's $20k per server and $147k per person.


Somebody's able to do the math and see through the bullshit.

Posted by: mbz1

Today's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot states:

QUOTE
If everyone reading this donated $10,
we could end the fundraiser today.
Please read a personal appeal.
Please help

Yesterday Jimbo begged for only $5, and promised to end the fundraising today,
"if everyone reading this donated $5" and so on.

So what happened? Airfare got more expensive? biggrin.gif

But jokes aside, this banner is really annoying and misleading, and hard to close. It has a button "please help", but no matter where one is to click inside this banner (including but not limited to Jimbos's image itself) , it will take one to the donation page. The only expedition is a small "x" in the right upper corner. If you'd be able to place your mouse precisely over this "x", it will close the banner.
Don't they understand that the banner that is made hard to close, will not increase the donations, but will do just the opposite? dry.gif

Posted by: Looch

I was coming here to post about how $5 was being asked for the other day, and now it's $10, but it looks like I wasn't the only person who noticed and I was beaten to posting it.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 16th November 2011, 2:46pm) *

Just thought I'd point out that (as of this morning), more than once every 3 minutes (on average) someone new is visiting the "http://wikipediareview.com/Top_10_Reasons_Not_to_Donate_to_Wikipedia" page.

They're coming from Germany, the Czech Republic, India, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Australia, the United States, and Pakistan -- and that's just a sample of the most recent 20 visitors.

They're searching Google for things like:
  • is it correct to donate money for wikipedia? (http://www.google.co.in/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=is%20it%20correct%20to%20donate%20money%20for%20wikipedia%3F, #5 result)
  • wikipedia donation statistics (https://www.google.com/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=wikipedia%20donation%20statistics, #2 result)
  • donating to wikipedia (http://www.google.co.uk/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=donating%20to%20wikipedia, #7 result)
  • how much money did wikipedia received from donations (https://www.google.com/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=how%20much%20money%20did%20wikipedia%20received%20from%20donations, #4 result)
  • how many people donate to wikipedia (http://www.google.se/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=how%20many%20people%20donate%20to%20wikipedia, #1 result)
  • donations to wikipedia (http://www.google.com.sg/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=donations%20to%20wikipedia, #2 result)
With this much traffic and search engine exposure, do we think it would be worth improving on the landing page? How so?


Getting some love from the http://forum.gamevn.com/showthread.php?880124-WIKIPEDIA-HAY-QUYEN-GOP-NGAY-SR-neu-sai-cho-mod-chuyen-dum-nhe-/page2 now.

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 23rd November 2011, 4:01am) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 16th November 2011, 2:46pm) *

Just thought I'd point out that (as of this morning), more than once every 3 minutes (on average) someone new is visiting the "http://wikipediareview.com/Top_10_Reasons_Not_to_Donate_to_Wikipedia" page.

They're coming from Germany, the Czech Republic, India, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Australia, the United States, and Pakistan -- and that's just a sample of the most recent 20 visitors.

They're searching Google for things like:
  • is it correct to donate money for wikipedia? (http://www.google.co.in/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=is%20it%20correct%20to%20donate%20money%20for%20wikipedia%3F, #5 result)
  • wikipedia donation statistics (https://www.google.com/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=wikipedia%20donation%20statistics, #2 result)
  • donating to wikipedia (http://www.google.co.uk/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=donating%20to%20wikipedia, #7 result)
  • how much money did wikipedia received from donations (https://www.google.com/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=how%20much%20money%20did%20wikipedia%20received%20from%20donations, #4 result)
  • how many people donate to wikipedia (http://www.google.se/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=how%20many%20people%20donate%20to%20wikipedia, #1 result)
  • donations to wikipedia (http://www.google.com.sg/search?sa=t&rct=j&q=donations%20to%20wikipedia, #2 result)
With this much traffic and search engine exposure, do we think it would be worth improving on the landing page? How so?


Getting some love from the http://forum.gamevn.com/showthread.php?880124-WIKIPEDIA-HAY-QUYEN-GOP-NGAY-SR-neu-sai-cho-mod-chuyen-dum-nhe-/page2 now.

http://pages.citebite.com/v1f2w4r6u2uew
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#.22Personal_Appeal.22_banners

Posted by: Looch

Jimmy Wales is getting complaints on his twitter about the donation ads. Three out of his five most recent tweets are responding to messages about it. In each case, he says to click the "x" to get rid of it.

Posted by: UseOnceAndDestroy

QUOTE(Looch @ Sun 27th November 2011, 11:54pm) *

he says to click the "x" to get rid of it.


Using your favourite ad blocker to prevent retrieval of any URL containing "title=special:bannercontroller" is way more effective. Pass it on.

Posted by: Kelly Martin

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 19th November 2011, 6:46am) *

Wow, what an excellent comment:

QUOTE
If that's half for staff and half for servers, it's $20k per server and $147k per person.


Somebody's able to do the math and see through the bullshit.
It's more like a third for servers, a third for staff, and a third for transit costs. But the point remains.

Posted by: Cla68

QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Mon 28th November 2011, 5:44pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 19th November 2011, 6:46am) *

Wow, what an excellent comment:

QUOTE
If that's half for staff and half for servers, it's $20k per server and $147k per person.


Somebody's able to do the math and see through the bullshit.
It's more like a third for servers, a third for staff, and a third for transit costs. But the point remains.


Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 12:28am) *



Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?


Why don't you ask this question on wiki, at jimbo's page for example?
You could also ask jimbo how many of his every two weeks flights from London to Florida are processed as business trips, and are paid by WMF biggrin.gif

Posted by: Cla68

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 1:52am) *

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 12:28am) *



Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?


Why don't you ask this question on wiki, at jimbo's page for example?
You could also ask jimbo how many of his every two weeks flights from London to Florida are processed as business trips, and are paid by WMF biggrin.gif


I believe Jimbo always flies first class, and it would be really, really audacious of him to charge that to the WMF. I'm more curious about what class Ms Gardner, Mr Möller, and other WMF executives travel in (business or economy), how much staff/assistants they take with them, what hotels they stay in (for example, if they have a choice between a Sheraton and a Four Seasons, which do they choose?), and the like.

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 4:30am) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 1:52am) *

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 12:28am) *



Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?


Why don't you ask this question on wiki, at jimbo's page for example?
You could also ask jimbo how many of his every two weeks flights from London to Florida are processed as business trips, and are paid by WMF biggrin.gif


I believe Jimbo always flies first class, and it would be really, really audacious of him to charge that to the WMF. I'm more curious about what class Ms Gardner, Mr Möller, and other WMF executives travel in (business or economy), how much staff/assistants they take with them, what hotels they stay in (for example, if they have a choice between a Sheraton and a Four Seasons, which do they choose?), and the like.

Well, I am not sure you read it in the beginning of this thread, but I asked a WMF employee who pays for his trip to a conference to India and how necessarily was it to fly to India in a first place versus using Internet for this conference. He's never responded, but I did http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&action=historysubmit&diff=3084740&oldid=3084738
I even cannot be angry with this idiot, who is a former WMF employee and a current WP admin Peteforsyth (T-C-L-K-R-D) , and who believes that asking a question who's paying for WMF employee trip is "an absurd insinuation"? Isn't it sad that he believes that asking these simple questions means "to stir shit up about Wikipedia"?

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Mon 28th November 2011, 4:28pm) *

Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?

Nope. Just a single figure on each annual report. (Page 5 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/a/ac/FINAL_10_11From_KPMG.pdf.)

For 2011 they claim $1,159,200, which is more than twice the expenses in 2010.
That would buy a lot of first-class tickets and $1000/night hotel rooms.

You should be angrier.

Posted by: Cla68

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 29th November 2011, 5:44am) *

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Mon 28th November 2011, 4:28pm) *

Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?

Nope. Just a single figure on each annual report. (Page 5 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/a/ac/FINAL_10_11From_KPMG.pdf.)

For 2011 they claim $1,159,200, which is more than twice the expenses in 2010.
That would buy a lot of first-class tickets and $1000/night hotel rooms.

You should be angrier.


Based on what I've observed, travel expenses can get inflated really fast if there isn't sufficient oversight. Travelers renting the SUV instead of the compact car, lodging in the Shangri-la instead of the Hilton, choosing to fly a Singapore airlines non-stop instead of United with a three-hour layover, claiming full per diem for the day you arrive back home, etc.

I don't know if WMF employees are doing this. I suspect that they're simply traveling more and taking more people on each trip. I guess I should ask them for their detailed travel expenses record.

That is telling that one of them reacted so defensively to Mbz1's question. If they're sensitive about travel expenses, then someone needs to look into it.

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 4:30am) *



I believe Jimbo always flies first class, and it would be really, really audacious of him to charge that to the WMF.


I have a silly question. If Jimbo could afford flying first class, why he himself does not donate to Wikipedia? Or maybe he does, but I could not find his name http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors#Sustaining_donors_.28.241.2C000_to_.244.2C999.29

Posted by: Kelly Martin

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 1:10pm) *
I have a silly question. If Jimbo could afford flying first class, why he himself does not donate to Wikipedia? Or maybe he does, but I could not find his name http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors#Sustaining_donors_.28.241.2C000_to_.244.2C999.29
Silly puppy. Jimmy donates his time to Wikimedia. Why should he also donate money?

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Tue 29th November 2011, 7:51pm) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 1:10pm) *
I have a silly question. If Jimbo could afford flying first class, why he himself does not donate to Wikipedia? Or maybe he does, but I could not find his name http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors#Sustaining_donors_.28.241.2C000_to_.244.2C999.29
Silly puppy. Jimmy donates his time to Wikimedia. Why should he also donate money?

Well, if for nothing else simply because a mention of his own donations would have sounded nice in his appeal for donations. It is like learning by example, is it not? I am sure more people would have donated to Wikipedia, if they saw Jimbo did too.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 2:56pm) *

QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Tue 29th November 2011, 7:51pm) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 1:10pm) *
I have a silly question. If Jimbo could afford flying first class, why he himself does not donate to Wikipedia? Or maybe he does, but I could not find his name http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors#Sustaining_donors_.28.241.2C000_to_.244.2C999.29
Silly puppy. Jimmy donates his time to Wikimedia. Why should he also donate money?

Well, if for nothing else simply because a mention of his own donations would have sounded nice in his appeal for donations. It is like learning by example, is it not? I am sure more people would have donated to Wikipedia, if they saw Jimbo did too.


I suppose Gil Penchina would rather see Jimbo pay off the $30,000 loan Jimbo owes Gil, before any big personal checks are written to the Wikimedia Foundation.

Posted by: thekohser

Anybody know how the current fundraiser is actually doing? The Foundation doesn't seem to have generated any http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fundraising_reports, or else I'm looking for stats in all the wrong places.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 1st December 2011, 6:51am) *

Anybody know how the current fundraiser is actually doing? The Foundation doesn't seem to have generated any http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fundraising_reports, or else I'm looking for stats in all the wrong places.


It appears that if you want to find out how much the WMF is raking in this year, you would http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2011/Tech_stats_and_resources#Stats. Of course, neither of those reports provides any value to the reader whatsoever, given that each of them returns the following message:

QUOTE
This page has been temporarily disabled due to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-11-28/Technology_report#outage. Please try again later.


So, apparently, our long-haired http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=35707&view=findpost&p=290092 Brandon Harris is also sort of responsible for breaking the fundraiser's statistical reports, thanks to his celebrity moment on Reddit.

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sun 4th December 2011, 4:17pm) *


So, apparently, our long-haired http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=35707&view=findpost&p=290092 Brandon Harris is also sort of responsible for breaking the fundraiser's statistical reports, thanks to his celebrity moment on Reddit.


Actually our "our long-haired smiley-face code developer" http://techland.time.com/2011/11/30/now-wikipedias-brandon-harris-can-follow-you-around-the-web/
QUOTE
Oh Wikipedia programmer Brandon Harris, how we’ve become accustomed to your glaring visage, all but commanding us to donate money to Wikipedia with the wild hair and crazy eyes of a modern day Rasputin.
and now you could see him randomly at any page that has nothing to do with wikipedia.
QUOTE
Simply install the ProgrammerAppeal extension and wait for Harris to randomly pop up on your browser. It’s like that time a strung-out metalhead kept following you after the Iron Maiden concert, except this time it’s on the internet.





Posted by: thekohser

Cute and spunky Megan Hernandez is http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2011#2011_Fundraiser_Launch_Update on the fundraiser. Once again, it looks like a record-setting success.

(Here's Megan http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Schnitzel.jpg schnitzel
on a WMF-paid tour of Europe.)

Posted by: Cla68

QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 5th December 2011, 2:43pm) *

Cute and spunky Megan Hernandez is http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2011#2011_Fundraiser_Launch_Update on the fundraiser. Once again, it looks like a record-setting success.

(Here's Megan http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Schnitzel.jpg schnitzel
on a WMF-paid tour of Europe.)


If they were paid per diem for the trip that may be one reason they appear so happy in the photo, although the food and drink does look tasty.

Posted by: Viridae

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 18th November 2011, 1:36am) *

The "10 Reasons Not" page is now up to 50 unique visitors per hour, which is about double yesterday's traffic.

I see that some of it is due to http://www.reddit.com/user/slickshark. Upvote time!


Oh http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/66js5/wikipediareview_sets_audacious_goal_265_million_pages/