[spac]

Contrarily to the negative sentiment expressed so far in the comments, I find branding an important question:

If a foundation does good work, you’d want the foundation to receive more money to do more good work.

For example, Wikipedia would benefit from many more tech investments, for example in the excellent wiki data and wikimedia research initiatives; or think of wiki vandalism and fake news.

It’s well known in the non-profit world (and intuitive) that spending money in marketing does indeed help achieve larger goals in terms of deployed funding.

Beyond funding, the fact that people (hacker news is not a representative sample) don’t recognize Wikimedia and the fact that it’s responsible for something that is used daily is a problem. It detracts from the project and removes visibility.

Edit: made it more readable

[51lver]

I would much prefer them to stay small, tight, and focused.

[mercer]

If only the Mozilla Foundation had a similar preference...