 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Just had one of the emails from Jimmy Wales asking me to repeat my donation, which I'm happy to do.
I can't help thinking that funding for it is a bit precipitous and there should be a better model they could adopt. Obvs sponsorship and paying for content has issues, so how should it pay for itself? Or is it a case that it can't and the current process of asking for donations is the only option?
I'm happy to fund it but I wonder if it's quite as important as it used to be.
maybe some sort of blue tick. so that people can demonstration information about them is bonafide.
I'm thinking maybe $20 a pop.
Thats my final offer.
Ok $8
I donated a few times, but then someone told me that Wikipedia has plenty of money already. Haven't researched this thoroughly but it seems quite plausible that there might be more impactful ways to make charitable donations elsewhere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fundraising_statistics
What are the costs? Isn't the content created by the users, a bit like... umm, a forum. Yes ok, a domain name and a bit of hosting.
I'm probably wide of the mark, which is why I ask.
I think you probably hugely underestimate the costs involved in 'a bit of hosting' which must run to many terrabytes for a site the size of Wikipedia.
Doh. Of course.