Topic: Wikipedia's yearly donation campaign; Time to accept Bitcoins? - page 2. (Read 16657 times)
February 12, 2013, 07:56:37 PM
This is silly. Stop harassing them guys. I'm pretty sure it's counter-productive.
February 12, 2013, 07:37:10 PM
I sent them 0.2 BTC using www.coinapult.com with this message:
I saw your message that you would be happy if every Wikipedia user would donate $5 to you.
Here is 0.2 bitcoins that as of date is a little more than $5. If you don't claim them in the next 30 days, I will be able to retrieve them. I also sent you bitcoins using BitPay here:
http://blog.bitpay.com/2012/11/donate-to-wikipedia-with-bitcoin.html
Bitcoin is a fixed supply, a first-of-its-kind, global-in-scale, decentralized digital currency and payment network that enables direct, peer-to-peer, borderless, pseudo-anonymous, nearly-instantaneous, nearly-free and irreversible cash-like transfers of value. The first currency and money system in the world which has no counter-party risk to hold and to transfer. It has many things in common with Wikipedia, let's be friends!
I will check my email in 30 days to see if they really need my $5.
The BitPay wikipedia topic is here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-donate-to-wikipedia-with-bitcoin-128382
I saw your message that you would be happy if every Wikipedia user would donate $5 to you.
Here is 0.2 bitcoins that as of date is a little more than $5. If you don't claim them in the next 30 days, I will be able to retrieve them. I also sent you bitcoins using BitPay here:
http://blog.bitpay.com/2012/11/donate-to-wikipedia-with-bitcoin.html
Bitcoin is a fixed supply, a first-of-its-kind, global-in-scale, decentralized digital currency and payment network that enables direct, peer-to-peer, borderless, pseudo-anonymous, nearly-instantaneous, nearly-free and irreversible cash-like transfers of value. The first currency and money system in the world which has no counter-party risk to hold and to transfer. It has many things in common with Wikipedia, let's be friends!
I will check my email in 30 days to see if they really need my $5.
The BitPay wikipedia topic is here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-donate-to-wikipedia-with-bitcoin-128382
February 12, 2013, 06:31:54 PM
Just send them a donation via the email function on blockchain or coinbase or coinapult even.. Then it's up to them to claim it, or let it expire and be returned to them. I really wonder if they'll let money they received just slip back away from them. 
Is there any difference in me asking you to give me your btc adress so I can give you some money and simply just e-mailing you a link saying, look, here's your money donation ?
Is it harder to reject in the latter case? And how so ?
To me, logic dictates that the cases are identical, but perhaps when people see the bill in front of them on the table, it's different than you asking them to have it while it's still in your pocket ?
The psychology of people never stops to amaze me.
Of course it's different. Right now all the emails they're getting they could very well think that only a low percentage of these would actually turn into donations if they accepted bitcoins and that the onslaught of emails they're getting is just a grassroots PR campaign. But when they get the actual payment there's no doubt someone wants to send them money and it becomes a completely different matter when rejecting it.
February 12, 2013, 02:49:19 PM
Just send them a donation via the email function on blockchain or coinbase or coinapult even.. Then it's up to them to claim it, or let it expire and be returned to them. I really wonder if they'll let money they received just slip back away from them.
Is there any difference in me asking you to give me your btc adress so I can give you some money and simply just e-mailing you a link saying, look, here's your money donation ?
Is it harder to reject in the latter case? And how so ?
To me, logic dictates that the cases are identical, but perhaps when people see the bill in front of them on the table, it's different than you asking them to have it while it's still in your pocket ?
The psychology of people never stops to amaze me.
February 12, 2013, 01:33:40 PM
Just send them a donation via the email function on blockchain or coinbase or coinapult even.. Then it's up to them to claim it, or let it expire and be returned to them. I really wonder if they'll let money they received just slip back away from them.
February 12, 2013, 12:48:21 AM
"to protect our independence we'll never run ads"
How can a company or organization be truly independent if it doesn't even accept a form of money that is more independent than all the others they accept? Hypocrites.
How can a company or organization be truly independent if it doesn't even accept a form of money that is more independent than all the others they accept? Hypocrites.
February 11, 2013, 10:34:31 PM
I think that would be the best way to go about it. Why not invite the founder of wikipedia to the bitcoin conference, then he can shake hands with important bitcoin people. Win win for everyone.
I think the bitcoin conference should make it a point to give invitations to important people that can help propell bitcoin forward.
I think the bitcoin conference should make it a point to give invitations to important people that can help propell bitcoin forward.
Sure. Inviting him could not hurt. But I'm pretty sure he'll decline politely.
Come on guys, let's face it. If we want Wikipedia to accept bitcoin donations, it's much more for bitcoin than for Wikipedia. You know it would be a big advertisement for bitcoin. We can't be partial about this.
That's right. But I think Wikipedia has the same spirit as Bitcoin. If it wasn't as big as it is right now, then they would probably be more interested. Another way to go about it would be to invite someone a bit further down the wikipedia food chain to the conference as well. If they see bitcoin is great, they can influence the right people in wikipedia.
February 11, 2013, 10:31:57 PM
Here's the email address where you can suggest bitcoin payments: [email protected]
February 11, 2013, 10:04:40 PM
I think that would be the best way to go about it. Why not invite the founder of wikipedia to the bitcoin conference, then he can shake hands with important bitcoin people. Win win for everyone.
I think the bitcoin conference should make it a point to give invitations to important people that can help propell bitcoin forward.
I think the bitcoin conference should make it a point to give invitations to important people that can help propell bitcoin forward.
Sure. Inviting him could not hurt. But I'm pretty sure he'll decline politely.
Come on guys, let's face it. If we want Wikipedia to accept bitcoin donations, it's much more for bitcoin than for Wikipedia. You know it would be a big advertisement for bitcoin. We can't be partial about this.
February 11, 2013, 09:20:28 PM
Does anyone on the forum know anyone in the committee that runs Wikipedia?
If so, maybe they could ask that bitcoin be accepted for donations...
If so, maybe they could ask that bitcoin be accepted for donations...
I think that would be the best way to go about it. Why not invite the founder of wikipedia to the bitcoin conference, then he can shake hands with important bitcoin people. Win win for everyone.
I think the bitcoin conference should make it a point to give invitations to important people that can help propell bitcoin forward.
February 11, 2013, 09:18:27 PM
Does anyone on the forum know anyone in the committee that runs Wikipedia?
If so, maybe they could ask that bitcoin be accepted for donations...
If so, maybe they could ask that bitcoin be accepted for donations...
February 11, 2013, 08:39:54 PM
Can anyone remind me why noone has made a bitcoin-friendly fork of Wikipedia already?
It's quite the undertaking, and why split such a wonderful project. They will accept bitcoin eventually, when everyone else does. Duh..
February 11, 2013, 08:36:20 PM
Can anyone remind me why noone has made a bitcoin-friendly fork of Wikipedia already?
February 11, 2013, 07:58:31 PM
I was recently looking something up on wikipedia.
Then again, I saw this message, asking for money.
I went to their checkout procedure.
It said:
- PayPal
- MasterCard
- Visa
- American Express
I wrote them an e-mail and said I liked their project and wanted to donate, I will however not do business through an evil company like PayPal, I have boycotted them for years. Every internet service that ask me to pay through PayPal receives no business from me.
Also, I readily told them I was not interested in enriching any of the CC-companies with fees associated with my donation.
I told them I would donate bitcoins, so I asked for their bitcoin address.
They simply stated they don't accept bitcoins, and that was that. What morons. If I ran a site and I asked for money, I would accept virtually anything people would give me. Also wikipedia is all about bringing education and knowledge to the larger population, ie. free open access to knowledge. Then they should also embrace bitcoin as it's the bleeding edge of finance, and aiding in giving indivuduals their freedom back.
If I ever see Jimmy Vales (did I get the name right ?), I will slap him with a wet trout and yell: "Bitcoin!"
Then again, I saw this message, asking for money.
I went to their checkout procedure.
It said:
- PayPal
- MasterCard
- Visa
- American Express
I wrote them an e-mail and said I liked their project and wanted to donate, I will however not do business through an evil company like PayPal, I have boycotted them for years. Every internet service that ask me to pay through PayPal receives no business from me.
Also, I readily told them I was not interested in enriching any of the CC-companies with fees associated with my donation.
I told them I would donate bitcoins, so I asked for their bitcoin address.
They simply stated they don't accept bitcoins, and that was that. What morons. If I ran a site and I asked for money, I would accept virtually anything people would give me. Also wikipedia is all about bringing education and knowledge to the larger population, ie. free open access to knowledge. Then they should also embrace bitcoin as it's the bleeding edge of finance, and aiding in giving indivuduals their freedom back.
If I ever see Jimmy Vales (did I get the name right ?), I will slap him with a wet trout and yell: "Bitcoin!"
November 10, 2012, 12:21:19 PM
IT would be interesting if someone did the following:
First hundreds of persons contribute to write e-mail templates asking wikimedia to accept bitcoin. Then someone makes a script or a program that shuffles these messages and sends a couple of them at random intervals every hour every day, perhaps even make random bursts of them too. Receiving hundreds of e-mails from different e-mail addresses and different domains every week about bitcoin, should possibly have some impact?
Another thing that would be possible was to set up a donation page, must be done by a very trusted forum member, and then just collecting funds for wikipedia. Then sending them an e-mail every week notifying them about their balance and how much is outstanding.
Perhaps an even more effective approach would be if somebody sensible and good 'sales person' would be able to speak to the right persons in wikipedia in person.
Arguments like freedom, 'anonymity' etc should be used to further our case.
First hundreds of persons contribute to write e-mail templates asking wikimedia to accept bitcoin. Then someone makes a script or a program that shuffles these messages and sends a couple of them at random intervals every hour every day, perhaps even make random bursts of them too. Receiving hundreds of e-mails from different e-mail addresses and different domains every week about bitcoin, should possibly have some impact?
Another thing that would be possible was to set up a donation page, must be done by a very trusted forum member, and then just collecting funds for wikipedia. Then sending them an e-mail every week notifying them about their balance and how much is outstanding.
Perhaps an even more effective approach would be if somebody sensible and good 'sales person' would be able to speak to the right persons in wikipedia in person.
Arguments like freedom, 'anonymity' etc should be used to further our case.
I don't think an automated emailbot is a good idea, and quite likely to backfire on this community's reputation if they find out what's going on. However your proposal to have someone set up a fund to gather Bitcoin donations on their behalf is absolutely brilliant. Money talks. The more their balance grows, the less they can ignore it.
November 09, 2012, 10:08:10 AM
IT would be interesting if someone did the following:
First hundreds of persons contribute to write e-mail templates asking wikimedia to accept bitcoin. Then someone makes a script or a program that shuffles these messages and sends a couple of them at random intervals every hour every day, perhaps even make random bursts of them too. Receiving hundreds of e-mails from different e-mail addresses and different domains every week about bitcoin, should possibly have some impact?
Another thing that would be possible was to set up a donation page, must be done by a very trusted forum member, and then just collecting funds for wikipedia. Then sending them an e-mail every week notifying them about their balance and how much is outstanding.
Perhaps an even more effective approach would be if somebody sensible and good 'sales person' would be able to speak to the right persons in wikipedia in person.
Arguments like freedom, 'anonymity' etc should be used to further our case.
First hundreds of persons contribute to write e-mail templates asking wikimedia to accept bitcoin. Then someone makes a script or a program that shuffles these messages and sends a couple of them at random intervals every hour every day, perhaps even make random bursts of them too. Receiving hundreds of e-mails from different e-mail addresses and different domains every week about bitcoin, should possibly have some impact?
Another thing that would be possible was to set up a donation page, must be done by a very trusted forum member, and then just collecting funds for wikipedia. Then sending them an e-mail every week notifying them about their balance and how much is outstanding.
Perhaps an even more effective approach would be if somebody sensible and good 'sales person' would be able to speak to the right persons in wikipedia in person.
Arguments like freedom, 'anonymity' etc should be used to further our case.
December 31, 2011, 10:46:15 PM
I was reading Wikipedia's donation FAQ and found this strange:
I mean, other than a potentially low credit limit, what incentive does the thief have for conserving the funds of a stolen credit card? (Edit: I can possibly see it with cloned cards, but a charge of $1.05 is not going to be more obvious than a charge of $0.25.)
Why don't they just admit that fixed credit card fees become cost-prohibitive for such small donations?
The talk page of that Article has been deleted, so I have no way of knowing if it has been brought up before.
Quote from: wikimediafoundation.org
Why is there a minimum donation?
The minimum donation amount is $1. We receive small donations from people who don't have much money, and we are really, really grateful to those donors. Truly, if the gift is meaningful to you, it's meaningful to us. But, it's not uncommon for people to use donation mechanisms such as ours to test stolen credit cards to see if they work. Those people typically use a very small dollar amount for their testing: we find a $1 minimum donation amount seems to deter them.
- https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en#Why_is_there_a_minimum_donation.3FThe minimum donation amount is $1. We receive small donations from people who don't have much money, and we are really, really grateful to those donors. Truly, if the gift is meaningful to you, it's meaningful to us. But, it's not uncommon for people to use donation mechanisms such as ours to test stolen credit cards to see if they work. Those people typically use a very small dollar amount for their testing: we find a $1 minimum donation amount seems to deter them.
I mean, other than a potentially low credit limit, what incentive does the thief have for conserving the funds of a stolen credit card? (Edit: I can possibly see it with cloned cards, but a charge of $1.05 is not going to be more obvious than a charge of $0.25.)
Why don't they just admit that fixed credit card fees become cost-prohibitive for such small donations?
The talk page of that Article has been deleted, so I have no way of knowing if it has been brought up before.
That does sound like a BS, cop out answer. But, are there fixed fees for non profit CC transactions? I thought ti was a set % of the transacted amount..?
I mean, if you are correct, it would be like the CC processors are soem kind of Mafia. And people are afraid to speak at all negatively about them. Though, even with what they are stating, that is pretty f'd up. The CC processors are able to tell them that Wiki can't accept small amounts because of fraud?
In any light, its another good reason for them to accept bitcoins...
cheers
Fees are usually $[flat amount based on how many transactions you do per month] + a % of transaction.
December 31, 2011, 11:46:54 AM
I was reading Wikipedia's donation FAQ and found this strange:
I mean, other than a potentially low credit limit, what incentive does the thief have for conserving the funds of a stolen credit card? (Edit: I can possibly see it with cloned cards, but a charge of $1.05 is not going to be more obvious than a charge of $0.25.)
Why don't they just admit that fixed credit card fees become cost-prohibitive for such small donations?
The talk page of that Article has been deleted, so I have no way of knowing if it has been brought up before.
Quote from: wikimediafoundation.org
Why is there a minimum donation?
The minimum donation amount is $1. We receive small donations from people who don't have much money, and we are really, really grateful to those donors. Truly, if the gift is meaningful to you, it's meaningful to us. But, it's not uncommon for people to use donation mechanisms such as ours to test stolen credit cards to see if they work. Those people typically use a very small dollar amount for their testing: we find a $1 minimum donation amount seems to deter them.
- https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en#Why_is_there_a_minimum_donation.3FThe minimum donation amount is $1. We receive small donations from people who don't have much money, and we are really, really grateful to those donors. Truly, if the gift is meaningful to you, it's meaningful to us. But, it's not uncommon for people to use donation mechanisms such as ours to test stolen credit cards to see if they work. Those people typically use a very small dollar amount for their testing: we find a $1 minimum donation amount seems to deter them.
I mean, other than a potentially low credit limit, what incentive does the thief have for conserving the funds of a stolen credit card? (Edit: I can possibly see it with cloned cards, but a charge of $1.05 is not going to be more obvious than a charge of $0.25.)
Why don't they just admit that fixed credit card fees become cost-prohibitive for such small donations?
The talk page of that Article has been deleted, so I have no way of knowing if it has been brought up before.
That does sound like a BS, cop out answer. But, are there fixed fees for non profit CC transactions? I thought ti was a set % of the transacted amount..?
I mean, if you are correct, it would be like the CC processors are soem kind of Mafia. And people are afraid to speak at all negatively about them. Though, even with what they are stating, that is pretty f'd up. The CC processors are able to tell them that Wiki can't accept small amounts because of fraud?
In any light, its another good reason for them to accept bitcoins...
cheers
December 31, 2011, 11:17:07 AM
I was reading Wikipedia's donation FAQ and found this strange:
I mean, other than a potentially low credit limit, what incentive does the thief have for conserving the funds of a stolen credit card? (Edit: I can possibly see it with cloned cards, but a charge of $1.05 is not going to be more obvious than a charge of $0.25.)
Why don't they just admit that fixed credit card fees become cost-prohibitive for such small donations?
The talk page of that Article has been deleted, so I have no way of knowing if it has been brought up before.
Quote from: wikimediafoundation.org
Why is there a minimum donation?
The minimum donation amount is $1. We receive small donations from people who don't have much money, and we are really, really grateful to those donors. Truly, if the gift is meaningful to you, it's meaningful to us. But, it's not uncommon for people to use donation mechanisms such as ours to test stolen credit cards to see if they work. Those people typically use a very small dollar amount for their testing: we find a $1 minimum donation amount seems to deter them.
- https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en#Why_is_there_a_minimum_donation.3FThe minimum donation amount is $1. We receive small donations from people who don't have much money, and we are really, really grateful to those donors. Truly, if the gift is meaningful to you, it's meaningful to us. But, it's not uncommon for people to use donation mechanisms such as ours to test stolen credit cards to see if they work. Those people typically use a very small dollar amount for their testing: we find a $1 minimum donation amount seems to deter them.
I mean, other than a potentially low credit limit, what incentive does the thief have for conserving the funds of a stolen credit card? (Edit: I can possibly see it with cloned cards, but a charge of $1.05 is not going to be more obvious than a charge of $0.25.)
Why don't they just admit that fixed credit card fees become cost-prohibitive for such small donations?
The talk page of that Article has been deleted, so I have no way of knowing if it has been brought up before.
Jump to: