Every now and then I’ll get an email from someone higher up in Wikipedia asking for a donation. I don’t really mind a tenner but I don’t know if it pads the pockets of corporate management or actual contributors. Also, are they really short of money or is this tugging at emotional strings a play at something else? I wish Wikipedia survives but there’s a lot of projects I need to donate to and I have a budget.

  • gencha
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    11 days ago

    Makes sense. If you’re contributing less than $1000 monthly to anything, you’re not making a difference. If you want dedicated people to be on the receiving end, who also do a great job, every single person will cost thousands each month. Wikimedia is literally spending millions each year.

    Honestly, don’t try to hunt for the “best” spot to contribute your exact amount of spare money to, with the hope of having the largest possible impact. It won’t happen. Treat a good friend to some food instead.

    If you really feel like you already got some value out of a service in the past, give what you can, without limiting yourself financially in the process. If you feel like you don’t have the $1 to spend for Wikipedia, don’t spend it. Don’t guilt trip yourself into donations ever. Your donation today will not prevent a service from turning into shit tomorrow. Pay for what you got

    • intensely_human
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 days ago

      I feel that keeping small streams of charity flowing have helped me see abundance in my life.

      I’m not financially rich but I’m pretty happy. And I mean I struggle. Bills often late. But a couple bucks a month is worth it to me for the psychological benefit.

      • gencha
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        I do give in small streams and I do large annual contributions. I’m entirely not opposed to sharing.

        I prefer to keep the small donations to individuals who also prefer a reliable stream of goodwill. Larger organizations also prefer reliable streams, but they also receive millions in donations overall, usually with significant large donors.

        If you look long enough, you’ll find enough material to not want to contribute to Wikimedia. If your contribution was only a drop in the pool to begin with, maybe this is one of the expenses that is not for you to carry.

    • Findmysec@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 days ago

      Thanks man. I would much rather give my time than my money for OSS projects, but I have a lot to learn and do not match up the quality of contributions needed in said projects. I’ll do what I can.

      • intensely_human
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        You can contribute by doing code reviews on PRs. Even if your contribution is only to ask “What does this do?” it can help locate places where code isn’t easily readable.

        Obviously use your judgment, but code review commenting is a nice way to get up to speed on a project, improve your own coding skills, and is valuable to the project too.

        I had an apprenticeship once at a dev shop where everybody was leagues above me. As basically the lowest-level coder both in status and in skill, I was surprised to find out my “curriculum” included doing code reviews on very senior people’s code.

        Now I swear by the practice. It’s kinda like anyone can be a therapist if they know how to listen. Anyone can provide value with code review if they keep their eyes open and communicate honestly.

    • MeetInPotatoes@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      I fully agree with not limiting themselves financially whether it’s 1,10,100 etc. Their aim is to bring knowledge in all languages to even the poorest parts of the world. If some Lemmy user’s bank account is one of the poorest parts of the world right now, lol…I mean only “you” know how much money you can stand to give while still living comfortably and being entertained in life.

      I have to take small disagreement with the money contribution not making a difference though. It’s the flip side of the same coin that tells people it’s find if they don’t vote cause their one vote won’t make a difference. The hole in the argument is that we don’t vote alone, and we don’t donate alone. The specific attitude “my vote won’t make a difference” actually costs millions of votes every year, just like “my $20 won’t make a difference” could cause millions of dollars of losses.

      But anyway, separate argument from the situation here as our Lemmiford here sounds like they’re in saving mode till things look up.

      • gencha
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        I get that, I really do, and I honestly believe you have exactly the right idea.

        But on the other hand, you have to realize that not all of the money purely goes to enabling knowledge sharing with Wikimedia. This is not an election, it’s a company, non-profit or for-profit doesn’t really matter. There are still people paying off business expenses from your donations.

        I fully understand the necessity of this, but you might just feel better if your $5 literally bought someone a meal or if it paid for a fraction of a business flight to promote Wikimedia.

        • MeetInPotatoes@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          Totally agree, the right to choose how best to spend your own charitable donations isn’t something I’d ever infringe on.