Also because it's good for people to have to think year by year. makes them aware and not take it for granted. People who have some investment (be it effort or money or time or whatever) value something more.
A wider community that has a reason to care is worth building - especially as the Wikimedia mission isn't just "build a website" but "make available free knowledge". In that context people willing to care matter, as an integral part of the mission. FT2 On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Bod Notbod <bodnot...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:17 PM, luke lenny <lennybodom...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > why can't wikimedia publish advertisements and generate revenue and > > become self-reliant,self-sustainable , instead of asking for funds > > from user every year again and again... > > There's a number of issues. But painting it in broad terms; although > advertising might make the projects *financially* stable, it may not > make their *content* stable. That's to say, a lot of contributors / > volunteers / editors might leave. > > I'd argue with your terminology, though. > > You say that advertising would make the Foundation "self-reliant and > self-sustainable". It wouldn't be though, would it? It would be > reliant on advertisers and sustained by advertisers. > > Bodnotbod > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
