Topic: Wikipedia (Read 4517 times)

It's all explained, just click the link.


So no, lower fees don't help much in this case.

I find it hard to believe that $0.07 is a statistically significant amount. Especially considering that most of the other payment methods involve high fees, so even if overall donations drop, the amount received by modzilla (or wikipedia) could potentially increase

Seven cents doesn't sound like much. However, at scale, it adds up. Our donation form will get roughly two million more visitors before the campaign concludes on December 31st — which means adding “Donate with Bitcoin” would reduce income by about $140,000 – a significant amount.
At this time, bitcoin donations are not high enough to offset that lost revenue. We want to make sure bitcoin donors can find a link to give bitcoin, but this test suggests our primary donation form isn't the optimum location.

Why? Likely for the same reasons Mozilla removed bitcoin donation button. It distracted page viewers resulting in less donations.

https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/

Why? Likely for the same reasons Mozilla removed bitcoin donation button. It distracted page viewers resulting in less donations.
https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/

...
I know that they are accepting it if you do some research BUT why hiding it ??
...

We received numerous requests from donors that they wanted bitcoin featured right on our primary donation form. Given the volume of page views to that form (millions during the life of the campaign), I was concerned that adding any unnecessary text would distract donors and depress non-bitcoin conversions, the source of more than 99% of all our campaign revenue. So we decided to add “Donate with Bitcoin” text, and test whether it depressed conversion or not. Here is what that looked like: [...]

The test showed that revenue per visitor drops by about $0.07 USD. Here is the Optimizely graph showing a 7.5% reduction in revenue per visitor:[...]

Shouldn't be that way though.  Look at Tor Project:

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate.html.en

Nice and clean donate page, Bitcoin highly visible without filling a bunch of info, and email is optional.

No excuses for Wikimedia or Mozilla's archaic and convoluted Donate system.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.

Shouldn't be that way though.  Look at Tor Project:

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate.html.en

Nice and clean donate page, Bitcoin highly visible without filling a bunch of info, and email is optional.

No excuses for Wikimedia or Mozilla's archaic and convoluted Donate system.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.

Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:



Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

In agreement if I cannot retain the option to maintain my pseudoanonyminity when making a donation to some group or organization then it is their loss.

I like you.  Carry on.

Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:



Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

At least other non profits like Mozilla, United Way, and Tor Project are more accessible and require less info when donating Bitcoin to them:

http://www.unitedway.org/pages/donate-bitcoin-to-united-way

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate

Wikipedia is a "non-profit" website that puts real businesses out of business. They have effectively cornered the online information market and instead of using advertising-based models (which create revenue from the non-enthusiast users), they ask the enthusiast users (who already contribute countless hours of work maintaining pages) for donations.

A few years ago I ran a very large online forum. All revenue was ad revenue. I disabled all ads for all registered users, because they're already contributing content to the site - you don't need to take their money, too. Instead, I let people who were not contributing by posting (unregistered users) contribute financially by littering the site with advertisements for them.

I strongly feel that this is the correct way to run a business (or even a nonprofit website), rather than ask your very best members to contribute money. Wikipedia should partner with Google's advertising and serve advertisements to all non-contributors. Google already puts them #1 for every search term (which pushes the informational sites on specific topics from real enthusiasts out of business), so it would only be natural.

If you want to donate to a site in that space, I'd recommend archive.org. The primary monetary contributors are going to be the users who utilize the resources they provide the most extensively, so asking for donations seems reasonable in their case.

Tails is okay and probably more worthy than archive.org. However, there are lower-funded privacy and anonymity projects you can contribute to that don't constantly have security holes. Properly configured TBB plus FDE is likely significantly safer than Tails.

Nice respectable, modern web browser, guy.

I tried to tell them to post a Bitcoin address last year during a donation campaign. Shame on them for not providing one.

I'd love to make an anonymous Bitcoin donation because I appreciate the service they provide and the worldwide cooperative nature of Wikipedia content.

Their loss.

you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?