Daniel Mayer wrote:
--- Dori slowpoke@gmail.com wrote:
What do you mean how? They track usage. I don't trust a company that's out to make money to not abuse their position. Even if they're well intentioned now, they could be bought off.
Every website can and often do track usage. Even we log that stuff.
Not every website is a for-profit company mining that data for marketing purposes. In fact, we have a strict privacy policy saying that we will never use it for marketing purposes, which answers.com does not appear to have.
"Diversify our income source" sounds horrible to me. That's not what's important.
Excuse me? What do you base that on? Are you at all involved in Wikimedia finance? Lemme check. No.
Excuse me? When did Wikimedia finance get run in a top-down corporate manner? Are you a CEO now, and we're all your paid employees? You realize this is a volunteer encyclopedia project, don't you, and we decide what's important? If this is going to become a "Wikimedia corporate decides what's important, and you all better shut up and listen and not complain about it", then fuck this, I'm out.
Do we even know how much money we'll be getting out of this? Have we exhausted all other possibilities? Whatever happened to the Google donation? Has the board gone to all possible sources before going to advertising deals?
This is not an advertising deal. It is one of many partnerships we will need to enter to help keep everything running.
No, it is an advertising deal. Putting a link on our website that someone is paying us to put there is clearly advertising.
-Mark