blog.jimmywales.com— Well, Calacanis raised some big big questions when he made the post regarding advertising revenues on Wikipedia. Well, who better to get a response from but Jimmy himself.... and so you have it.
Oct 31, 2006View in Crawl 4
Interesting to note that Jason Calacanis made the second comment on Mr Wales' blog post. He still doesn't seem to understand the problems with advertising on Wikipedia, but oh well.
jwschmidtOct 31, 2006
"Any changes to the software must be gradual and reversible. We need to make sure that any changes contribute positively to the community, as ultimately determined by me, in full consultation with the community consensus." <a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jimbo_Wales/Statement_of_principles">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jimbo_Wales/Statement_of_principles</a>
daveydweebOct 31, 2006
Interesting to note that Jason Calacanis made the second comment on Mr Wales' blog post. He still doesn't seem to understand the problems with advertising on Wikipedia, but oh well.
daveydweebNov 1, 2006
Huh? Wikipedia made almost $400,000 from its December 2005 fundraising campaign, and is able to budget three-quarters of a million dollars toward keeping the site up last year. Wikipedia runs just fine with the money it currently makes, thanks to the generosity of its community.I think, before you argue the benefits of advertising -- of ANY kind -- you really need to demonstrate why Wikipedia needs that money in the first place: <a class="user" href="http://daveydweeb.com/2006/10/31/calacanis-responds-but-still-doesnt-get-it/">http://daveydweeb.com/2006/10/31/calacanis-responds-but-still-doesnt-get-it/</a>