[nullfrigid]

> the Wikimedia foundation does (find ways to spend the money and keep asking for more),

I remember reading an article about that, how Jimmy Wales was driving super expensive sportscars around and such - it made me pretty much resolve to never donate to them. Ever.

Not withstanding the super aggressive please for cash every September or whenever they do it.

[trogdor]

> I remember reading an article about that, how Jimmy Wales was driving super expensive sportscars around and such - it made me pretty much resolve to never donate to them. Ever.

What is the connection between Jimmy Wales’ personal spending choices and your decision to never donate to the Wikimedia Foundation? As far as I can tell, Wales is not paid by the Wikimedia Foundation.

[account42]

You don't see a problem with someone leading a 1%er lifestyle asking for donations from people substantially less well off while being misleading about what those donations are used for?

[trogdor]

You are responding to something I did not say.

What is the connection between Jimmy Wales’ personal lifestyle and the Wikimedia Foundation? Wales is not and has never been paid by the Wikimedia Foundation. He is not fundraising for himself.

[eesmith]

I don't understand your viewpoint. Is it specifically about Wales? Are you really that much against driving? Or against expensive sports cars?

Like, David Heinemeier Hansson drives super expensive sportscars - does that mean you don't use anything he works on?

I checked the Form 990s back to 2004 at https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/200... . Wales has never received compensation from the Wikimedia Foundation.

Is your issue that he makes his personal wealth from some other source, and doesn't transfer enough of it to Wikipedia? If so, do you have the same views for board members of other non-profits?

[nullfrigid]

> I don't understand your viewpoint.

I suspect you understand it pretty much perfectly, you just don't think the underlying premises of my position are correct.

> Wales has never received compensation from the Wikimedia Foundation.

Buying an expensive sportscar in the name of the foundation and then using it as though it were a personal car wouldn't show up as compensation.

I tried finding more, but the accusations against Wales are mentioned on the wiki page for wiki controversies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedia_controversie...

Maybe it's just accusations, although I remember reading articles as well. Although maybe if Jimmy was more transparent about where his wealth came from, and maybe if Wikipedia didn't disingenuously and constantly beg for money despite having a surplus, I'd be less skeptical.

[eesmith]

What I know is that an awful lot of people put very high standards on those working for charity or for the general good, where anything perceived as personal indulgence is treated as hypocrisy, and used to denigrate the overall goal. (These same people often don't care what greedy money grabbers do, since they aren't being held to the same standards.)

What I don't know is if you are being that sort of a person specifically about Wales and Wikipedia, or about any sort of charitable organization, or if your disdain has some other reason.

I wasn't able to find a mention of Wikipedia using their money to buy him a sportcar. The link you pointed to mentions "Jimmy Wales was accused by former Wikimedia Foundation employee Danny Wool of misusing the foundation's funds for recreational purposes." then says "Brad Patrick denied any wrongdoing by Wales or the foundation, saying that Wales accounted for every expense and that, for items for which he lacked receipts, he paid out of his own pocket"

Is the article you read based on that accusation?

If his money does not come from the Wikimedia Foundation, why would it affect things? Like, if he charges $80K speaking fees and gets invited to 4 of those talks per year, then he could easily rent an expensive sport car for a few days.

As I wrote, there are a lot of rich people who are on non-profit boards. They aren't transparent about all of their funding sources. Are you equally dismissive of them as well as their non-profits?

If you don't like their begging ads, don't give them money. The same holds for your local public radio station, which will have fund raising even when they have a surplus.

FWIW, Wikipedia is not currently asking me for money, even when I visit in a new private window.