- In Wednesday probably Filip Maljkovic and Djordje Stakic would have
presentation of Wikipedia for 160 students of University of Novi
Pazar. (Presentation is based on one German Power Point presentation.)
- In Thursday Djordje Stakic would have presentation of Wikipedia on
the Faculty for Mathematics of Belgrade University.
- We started with cooperation with Free Software Network of Serbia,
which is associate organization of Free Software Foundation Europe and
the next steps we would work together.
- In the second half of January we would have two
presentations/speeches in the Youth Cultural Center of Belgrade (the
most important alternative cultural center in Belgrade;
http://www.domomladine.org/): The first one would be presentation of
Wikipedia, the second one would be the talk about free software and
projection of the movie Revolution OS.
- In February we would have two presentations/speeches, but we didn't
make materials yet.
- In the first half of March Richard Stallman would come in Belgrade.
(Not 100% sure, but we would know that in the next couple of days.)
- In the second half of April Jimbo would be in Belgrade (I hope in
Zagreb and Ljubljana, too).
- In May we would organize free knowledge/free software
(Wikipedia/GNU) festival in Belgrade.
On 12/25/05, The Hooded Man <hoodedman(a)shadowedcorner.com> wrote:
> > Perhaps it will, but the foundation will not be able steal credit from
> > the actual authors of the works in Wikipedia for itself, at least not
> > without a legal fight. Most quality works in Wikipedia are the work of
> > a small number of authors per work, not these massively collaborative
> > efforts as has been misrepresented to the free software foundation.
>
> I think the point is:
>
> 1.) Do you think Wikimedia would do this?
>
> 2.) They would not be able to do this. A legal fight would be stupid;
> database dumps are publicly available that clearly show full author history.
>
> If Wikimedia wanted to steal the articles, they could delete the entire edit
> history and remove it from all database dumps. But then people would still
> have them. It's impossible for them to do that.
>
> 3.) There is nothing that can be legally "stolen". By writing an article,
> the authors have released their work under the GFDL.
>
> Let's not get into conspiracy theories.
There is no conspiracy theory needed. You ask "would the foundation do
this", but we need to first be clear on what 'this' means. If 'this'
means treating our authors in any way which is unethical today, I
stand firmly that the answer is clearly no. In the future, I can not
answer because my crystal ball is not that powerful. If 'this' means
to work to cause changes to be made to future versions of the licenses
which temporarily increase the foundations ease at the expense at
removing the protection of the authors from unethical actions in the
future, I must answer a resounding yes because it is demonstrably
true.
The Wikimedia foundation has been quietly advocating to the Creative
Commons and the Free Software foundations alterations to further
versions of the appropriate licenses which will allow the operators of
websites such as Wikipedia the authority to permit redistribution of
content submitted to their website with attribution to the site rather
than the author of the content. In effect, the *single* remaining
tangible return an author of freely licensed content receives (their
authorship credit) will be removed and granted to the priesthood of
intellectual property barons who have apparently earned the right to
take credit for the blood and sweat of a world of people because of
their great feat of operating a website.
For the latest in the implementation of this grand vision, take a look
at the terms of the CC-Wiki license, or the mysteriously vague
attribution terms so cowardly sneaked into CC-BY-SA v2.0. These
changes to cc-by-sa could have been implemented as another CC license
flag 'CA' (community attribution) but instead it was decided to
include the changes into the root license with no mention in the
layman version, presumably because such a change would fail to change
the license of existing works against the consent of the authors and
would probably too much attention to this difficult issue. Although
this has not been widely noticed, I certainly am not the only one...
For example see the interesting distribution terms on enwiki
User:Jamesday.
The argument used to advance this change is that, somehow, by being
submitted to a collaborative authorship site a document no longer has
authors but is somehow authored by the 'community'. In some cases a
compelling argument can indeed be made that there was no effective
single person author of the work, but even in these cases (which I
contend are rare) it takes a fantastic leap of faith to make the claim
that some organization (non-profit or otherwise) is the sole official
legal voice of the above mentioned ephemeral 'community' of authors
simple because they operate a website which is used by that community.
But, indeed, that is exactly what is being claimed and what is being
swallowed because it's a lot easier to pretend that a website operator
represents the community because the reality of the matter (that the
community is a shifting cloud of unclear membership and
representation) is useless for solving the real challenges presented
by the requirement of preserving something as simple as authorship
credit in the world of paper.
Basically we're reaching a point where silly details like the moral
obligation to credit the authors of a work are hindering the grand
vision of the knowledge of the world made available to all at the
lowest cost possible. This is a hard problem, so rather than dealing
with it head on, the details are being swept under the rug. Licenses
will and have been retroactively changed to reflect this
prioritization of the quick solution over ethical obligations.
Normally I would not worry about this, because such changes which defy
the character of the licenses agreed to by the creators of content
would never stand... but the more I consider the issue the more I
realize how many differing forces will support such changes for both
laudable (in the case of the foundation) and selfish reasons, and it
leaves me feeling unsure and angry.
I fear that we, the community of authors and spokesmen who support the
propagation of knowledge freely to the world, have become so impatient
with the slowness of achieving our goals that we have begun to take
steps to extinguish the protective flame of decentralization which
immunizes our work from the privatization, exploitation, and
commercial imprisonment by greedy self interests, simply because the
resulting legal obligations of that decentralized existence have
become a temporary hindrance to our important goals.
Such a move to promote the notion that the operator of a
telecommunication service (isn't that what the foundation claims to be
when it invokes the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA as a
reassurance that our negligent handling of copyright matters will go
unpunished) is granted a special position of unique control over the
creative works by the users of that service will not only be supported
by the operators of Wiki's who are currently so inconvenienced, but it
will also be strongly supported by the newly re-merged
telecommunications giants so eager to exercise their believed right to
extract maximum profit from every bit transferred across their glass.
The words "theft" and "steal" constantly create confusion when applied
to information, it is unfortunate that we use them. You are quite
correct that no one can take away what we already have, but it is
quite possible that through changes in license that powerful interests
will be able to claim special rights over the works of others because
of their ownership of telecommunications infrastructure at least that
is the notion embodied by the proposed license changes. So that
while you will be free to use the content you helped create, another
group, by virtue of their operation of a telecommunications service,
will be far more free. You can not claim that you are free so long as
there is another group which has more freedom with the work you
created.
Welcome to the new serfdom.
Today we love and trust our telecommunications service providing
masters, but what changes does the future bring?
Copied from:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fund_drives/2005/Q4/Day_9
-------------------------------------------------------------
==Saturday 24 December==
A total of 264 donations were made through PayPal on '''Day 9''', yielding the equivalent of
$8948.90 USD. The average donation that day was $33.90. This is an increase of $2137.63 over Day 8
and is also the highest average donation so far in the drive. Most notably, we passed the $100,000
milestone on this day!
MoneyBookers donations rose by $46.73 that day, bringing that total to $734.58. The Wikimedia
office was closed on Saturday, so there are no new mail donations to report. Hopefully, the first
Dexia updates will arrive in my mail box on Tuesday (Monday is a federally-observed holiday). Once
they arrive, I'll update each of the daily reports to reflect those daily totals.
:Total donated on Day 8: '''$8995.63'''
:Grand total at end of day: '''$101,006.45'''
Breakdown of Day 9 PayPal donations:
AUD 164.50 (123.46 USD)
CAD 444.22 (365.55 USD)
EUR 1,591.07 (1,932.66 USD)
GBP 275.95 (494.86 USD)
JPY 104,248.00 (941.88 USD)
USD 5,090.49
Total 8,948.90 USD
Copied from: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-24/report/
==Special thanks to those who gave large donations==
The largest donation this day was $1000 and was made by Jeff Moe. There were also many donors who
gave the equivalent of about $100 or more (listed in no particular order); Luis Cavique Santos,
Kazuhisa Ueyama, James Sweeney, Mike Blaszczak, Katsuji Ishikawa, Kenneth Truelove and 15
anonymous donors.
:<small>Note: While large donations are great, it should be noted that about 70% of all the money
donated to the Wikimedia Foundation comes from donations that are the equivalent of $50 or less
and the average donation is about $25.</small>
==Selected donor comments==
Let's all thank everybody who donated on this day by reading their comments.
:Full listing at: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-24/detail/
*"grazie per lo sforzo" by anonymous
*"I've saved a lot of money here that I might have spent on out-of-date reference books printed on
dead trees." by anonymous
*"I firmly believe that Wikipedia deserves the support of all of its users." by M Dunsky
*"Wenn man schon in der Hauptsache kostenfreie Dienstleistungen nutzt, sollte man auch den Anstand
besitzen, etwas zu bezahlen, vor allem wenn finanzielle Unterstützung dringend gebraucht wird." by
anonymous
*"Grateful for the wealth of information so brilliantly put together. A great idea and sincere
hopes for continuing development; hence the donation" by anonymous
*"For Mark Fox" by anonymous
*"Thank you. You have helped so many with their coursework and assignments. Always a guarantee to
find updated, easy to understand and informative stuff on Wikipedia." by anonymous
*"Wikipedia is an example of cooperation, participation and innovation. Keep information free!" by
Damon Ramsey
*"The best thing I ever saw on the net" by Maarten Braakhekke
*"頑張って欲しい" by kazuhisa Ueyama
*"Knowledge guarantees Freedom" by anonymous
*"Wish the Wikimedia Foundation another successful year in 06. BTW thank you for the Christmas
card." by Eric Bouse
*"Wikipedia is what the internet was made for. Here's a little donation to help the people who
make it possible :D" by George Kettleborough
*"zur weiterentwicklung" by Thomas Junge
*"Wikipedia: my reference work of choice! Thanks, everybody!" by anonymous
*"An indispensable resource, an elegant site, no advertisements, and a worthy cause." by anonymous
*"Keep the change" by anonymous
Some of my personal favorites:
*"You are a great resource, for the people, of the people and by the people. And in fact, I got a
crucial pointer in my research from one of your articles. Thank you." by anonymous
*"I can't think of a better project to donate to!" by anonymous
*"for freedom of knowledge and privilege of education for everyone" by Christoph Wagner
*"I wear my Wikipedia t-shirt with pride!" by anonymous
*"So much to learn, so little time..." by anonymous
*"Are you hiring?" by Mike Blaszczak
-- Daniel Mayer
__________________________________
Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year.
http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
daniwo59(a)aol.com schreef:
[cut]
>
> I wonder how we can use this to our advantage. I also wonder if we can get a
> copy.
>
> Danny
I wonder of the know that Wikipedia is almost as big regarding web
traffic as cnn.com and most likely be bigger very soon.
http://tinyurl.com/at7sw
You should ask CNN of you can get permission to put a copy of it online
for Wikimedia.
Other Wikipedias can do that also. I am doing that for the dutch
Wikipedia. When there is a radio interview with a Wikipedian or only
about WikipediaNL I try to get permission for the use of that audio
recording. Until now the responds is very good. The like Wikipedia and
give easy permission. That is fun to have, especialy some years later.
Wikipedias can also collect paper clippings about there project from
there local news papers. When you are somewhere telling about Wikipedia
it is nice that you can show that.
--
Contact: walter AT wikipedia PUNT be
Ook een artikeltje schrijven? Zorg dan dat je niet achter een proxy zit.
http://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Stemmen_voor_bug_550_via_Bugzilla
To my surprise, the segment Inside, Outside on CNN"s show In the Money did a
segment on Wikipedia. Overall, it was rather positive. They did make some
jokes about the Seigenthaler incident, but one of the two commentators noted to
the anchor that it was corrected and that Wikipedia was the victim of a
prank. The anchor said that everyone, including CNN, uses Wikipedia, and they
decided that it was a necessary Internet phenomenon. They also said that
Wikipedia is striving for greater accuracy, and mentioned the fundraising drive,
which they said was to help improve quality.
While they were not 100 percent accurate, it was, overall, a very positive
spin on us.
I wonder how we can use this to our advantage. I also wonder if we can get a
copy.
Danny
Copied from:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fund_drives/2005/Q4/Day_8
-------------------------------------------------------------
==Friday 23 December==
A total of 359 donations were made through PayPal on Day 8, yielding the equivalent of $6,811.27
USD. The average donation that day was $18.97. While this is both the lowest daily total and the
lowest average donation so far in the drive, it was not unexpected; a great many people were very
busy getting ready for Christmas that day.
Moneybookers donations rose by about $140, bringing that total to $687.85. Mail donations
increased by $625, our largest daily increase in mail donations in the drive so far, bringing that
total to $720. I'm still waiting for the first Dexia updates to arrive in the mail. Once they
arrive, I'll update each of the daily reports to reflect those daily totals.
:Total donated on Day 8: '''$7671.27'''
:Grand total at end of day: '''$93,418.67'''
Breakdown of Day 8 PayPal donations:
AUD 197.99 (148.59 USD)
CAD 142.46 (117.23 USD)
EUR 1,912.28 (2,322.83 USD)
GBP 178.50 (320.10 USD)
JPY 30,883.00 (279.03 USD)
USD 3,623.49
Total 6,811.27 USD
Copied from: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-23/report/
==Special thanks to large donors==
The largest donation this day was $200.00 USD and was made by Barry Langdon-Lassagne. There were
also many donors who gave the equivalent of about $100 or more (listed in no particular order);
Romary Daval, Domas Mituzas, KENGO Nakajima, Alan Rhodes, Lutz Kayser, Peter Hare, and seven
anonymous donations.
:Note: While large donations are great, it should be noted that about 70% of all the money donated
to the Wikimedia Foundation comes from donations that are the equivalent of $50 or less and the
average donation is about $25.
==Selected donor comments==
Let's all thank everybody who donated on this day by reading their comments.
:Full listing at: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-23/detail/
*"An eminently worthy undertaking" by Craig Glennie
*"Longue vie au libre partage des connaissances!" by Philippe Teuwen
*"I don't know how we got on without Wikipedia. Please don't cave it to pressure groups." by
anonymous
*"This donation to Wikipedia is in memory of McRae Family, Ottawa,Ontario,Canada" by Craig McRae
*"Poursuivez votre labeur fantastique" by anonymous
*"The best reference that ever existed" by David Kirkpatrick
*"I'm very grateful to Wikimedia. Because of it I can do research very quick. I am living with
Wikimedia whenever I have free time during the day" by Tam Nguyen
*"Wissen ist Macht! Keep up the great work!" by André Heßling
*"I donate for a clean and proven Wikipedia" by anonymous
*"Merry Christmas and many Greetings from Austria to Wikipedia" by Manfred Halver
*"Wikipedia's open/free nature is really what allows it to thrive. I think a service like this
would not be possible if it weren't for Free Software. Please consider donating to at www.fsf.org"
by Pol Danilov
*"Wikipedia ist der wahre Geist des Webs! Weiter so!" by Peter Köller
*"I hope you guys realize what a huge effect you have on the Internet community, and we the users
truly appreciate the immense work you put in. LONG LIVE WIKIPEDIA!" by Edwin Choi
*"I will be giving more as money comes in (chrismas is a costly time)" by anonymous
*"Por plibonigado de Vikipedio." by Gokhan San
*"In honor of my Godparents Lucy, John, Theresa and Ron...Happy Christmas!" by Josh Courteau
*"This project has saved me much more than this in time, convenience and useful knowledge. I'll be
*paying another visit here soon enough." by Stephen Allen
*"in honor of Aaron Kuntz" by anonymous
*"gracias a vosotros" by Raul Aguaviva
*"Best..website..ever." by anonymous
*"naturally..." by KENGO Nakajima
Some of my personal favorites:
*"Use the site so much, would be criminal not to!" by Jack Hynes
*"You changed my life, guys. I am sorry I can only contribute with such a modest amount." by
anonymous
*"The greatest progress of mankind in the last 5 years." by Michael Young
*"let us be even more successful than Britannica" by anonymous
*"My bonus check, with love." by Jeffrey Friedlander
*"Rock on, Wikipedia. Rock on." by anonymous
*"No comment." by anonymous
-- Daniel Mayer
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
Copied from:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fund_drives/2005/Q4/Day_7
-------------------------------------------------------------
A total of 455 donations were made through PayPal on '''Day 7''', yielding the equivalent of
$10,107.89 USD. The average donation that day was $22.22. Small increases in mail and Moneybookers
donations brings those totals to $95 and $545.33 respectively. I'm still waiting for the first
Dexia updates to be mailed to me.
Grand total for the whole drive at the end of Day 7: '''$85,839.88'''
AUD 172.41 (129.39 USD)
CAD 364.36 (299.84 USD)
EUR 3,132.43 (3,804.93 USD)
GBP 273.99 (491.35 USD)
JPY 29,012.00 (262.12 USD)
USD 5,120.26
Total 10,107.89 USD
Copied from: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-22/report/
==Special thanks to large donors==
The largest donation this day was $500.00 USD and was made by Lawrence Lessig. There were also
many donors who gave the equivalent of about $100 or more (listed in no particular order); Dr
Horst W Doelle, J Nasser, Sebastian Kloska, Joseph Emile MARTIN, Urs Gilgen, Frederique Guilbert,
Robert Matthews, James Craig, Jonathan Brown, Chris Sachs, Andrew Maretz, Paul Seet, Tabrez Syed,
Lawrence Lessig and 10 anonymous donors.
==Selected donor comments==
Let's all thank everybody who donated on this day by reading their comments.
:Full listing at: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-22/detail/
*"Go Wiki Go!" by Drew Williams
*"For Paul Wright for Christmas" by anonymous
*"布施いたします。" by anonymous
*"Thank you for showing the power of sharing." by Lee Carleton
*"I'm poor. But I love cool stuff!" by Rasmus Rydstrom
*"С точки зрения
глобальной
градации..." by anonymous
*"without you i could not do my assignments!" by alexander onea
*"Good job guys(and girls of course)! Every reader should donate 1 EURO and the progress bar will
fast increase! Gruesse aus Deutschland!" by Oliver Moeller
*"I've already gotten more value than my donation." by Vincent Wright
*"I use Wikipedia so much that I would feel guilty if I didn't donate." by anonymous
*"Ich bedanke mich!" by Alfred Soehl
*"first point of reference for almost everything" by anonymous
*"Quickly replacing Google as my first destination for information on a topic -- in a few years I
suspect we won't know how we lived without it." by Conor Sen
*"go portuguese wikipedia!" by Luis Fagundes
*"Thanks mates!" by Florian Antretter
*"Weiter So!!!!!!!" by Steffen Rehnig
Some of my personal favorites:
*"Proof that the best things in the world are free." by Vijay P Choksi
*"Simply the greatest website and information resource in the history of the world. I am immensely
proud of this site" by Paul C. Chapman
*"Wikipedia is built on millions of small edits. Let's keep it alive with millions of small
donations." by James Lovell
*"Wikipedia makes me look with hope at the future of humanity." by Dario Teixeira
*"For Freedom" by James Hanks
-- Daniel Mayer
__________________________________
Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year.
http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
I've gone ahead and committed the new page protection UI. This allows seeing
exactly what a page is set to, and logs a bit more information; so no more "hey,
is this page really protected or just protected against moves?".
It's a bit more complex, but hopefully not too scary.
Additionally there's a new level between unprotected/default permissions and
sysop-only; this is set up on en.wikipedia.org and will restrict edits by
unregistered users and accounts less than four days old.
(This is to implement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:SEMI )
There's now a timestamp field on the user table for the registration date, which
is used to calculate the age (this'll be included on newly registered accounts
but is NULL on older ones).
The age setting replaces the percentage formerly used for the sitewide move
limitations.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Bryan Derksen wrote:
> Alfio Puglisi wrote:
>
>> There are some independent issues there have been mixed up, confusing
>> the discussion:
>
> Indeed, this is the usual pattern when stable versions are discussed. :)
>
>> 1) Using the review process to somehow decide that a certain revision
>> of an article is the good one. That's the stable revision.
>
> No problem here, always nice to add more tools to the toolbox. I've
> been wanting this sort of development since forever.
>
>> 2) What to present readers. The latest revision? The last stable
>> revision? Some combination of the two?
>
> This is where I'm differing from Magnus. I think the "default" view
> should be the latest version, not the stable version, because that's
> the version that we need editors to actually _work_ on.
This is more confusion of issues. The question is about readers, and you
respond by talking about editors. Granted, there is some overlap, but
increasingly we need to acknowledge that the two are distinct groups and
many in the first group will never be in the second.
The default for readers should be a stable version. The default for
editors should be the latest version, the one that can be, and needs to
be, edited. The issue is how to guess whether someone is in a particular
group.
One solution that comes to mind immediately is to use logging in as a
guide. If someone doesn't log in, they're presumed to be a reader and
given the stable version, if any, and the development version (suitably
labeled) if no stable version exists. If someone logs in, they're
presumed to be an editor and given the development version, with a
preferences option in case they wish to change this.
To forestall the inevitable complaint, this would not be a step in the
direction of eliminating "anonymous" edits. In fact, because it provides
more "reliable" content for most readers, it could and should be
accompanied by lifting the restrictions on "anonymous" editing.
> Wikipedia is a work in progress, our goal is to _produce_ an
> encyclopedia rather than merely _displaying_ one.
True enough, but then you say...
> But our goal isn't to _show_ an encyclopedia to people, it's to get
> people to help us _write_ one. Let Answers.com worry about showing our
> material to people.
"Wikipedia is first and foremost an effort to create *and distribute* a
free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality to every single person
on the planet in their own language." (emphasis mine)
Our goal is very much to show people an encyclopedia, and trying to
treat the writing process as if it's wholly separable from this is a
mistake. If Answers.com, Directmedia, or anyone else wants to help with
this, that's great, but we have a mission to distribute, and we should
not abdicate it by saying other people will take care of it. Executing
core objectives is not something you outsource.
--Michael Snow
Copied from:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fund_drives/2005/Q4/Day_6
-------------------------------------------------------------
A total of 497 donors gave the equivalent of $12,466.34 USD through PayPal on '''Day 6'''
('''Wednesday 21 December''') of the fundraiser. While this is a very small decrease from Day 5
($28.46) it does represent a modestly higher average donation ($25.08 vs $22.72). Moneybookers
donations amounted to about $90, bringing that total to $474.77. No update today on mailed or
money transfer donations.
Grand total for the whole drive at the end of Day 6: $75,641.43
PayPal breakdown for Day 6:
AUD 118.20 (88.71 USD)
CAD 585.97 (482.20 USD)
EUR 2,497.40 (3,033.57 USD)
GBP 735.10 (1,318.25 USD)
JPY 52,112.00 (470.83 USD)
USD 7,072.78
Total 12,466.34 USD
Copied from: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-21/report/
==Special thanks to large donors==
The largest donation this day was $500.00 USD and was made by Manoj Padki. There were also many
donors who gave the equivalent of about $100 or more (alphabetical order); Raed Abdullah, David
Bosman, Lindy Do, Rex Fujikawa, Tom Gally, Neil Greenleaves, Hartmut Geissbauer, Peter Goddard,
Ryan Hoffman, Manoj Padki, Graham Laundon, Eugene Mihaliuk, Michael Nadler, William McQueen, Steve
Reseigh, Anand Shukla and 15 anonymous donors.
==Selected donor comments==
Let's all thank everybody who donated on this day by reading their comments.
:Full listing at: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-21/detail/
*"軽くなったらいいなぁ " by anonymous
*"I am happy to support this fantastic resource. I urge everyone to do the same." by Oliver
Gouldthorpe
*"A wonderful tool for learning. Please keep up the good work!" by anonymous
*"WikiPedia ist wunderbar. Dieser Ansatz wird einiges umwälzen." by anonymous
*"free is the mind - as should be knowledge" by Christian Schubert
*"Wikipedia is pretty much the best general source on information in the world." by anonymous
*"so much useful information & easily accessible keep up the good work" by anonymous
*"Wikipedia is the best starting point for researching any topic." by anonymous
*"Thank you. Freedom has no price." by anonymous
*"You've set up a great infrastructure. The articles will keep getting better!" by anonymous
*"Will donate everytime to a good cause - Knowledge should be free to everyone who seeks it" by
Collin Wu
*"Many thanks for the incredible service; keep up the good work!" by Peter Goddard
*"for the continuance of free knowledge" by anonymous
*"What is the internet without wikipedia ?" by David Bosman
*"Das ist es wert!" by Alexander Buesing
Some of my personal favorites:
*""Knowledge is power" and thanks for making this so accessible." by anonymous
*"This site is a major foundation block in the history of the Internet and our information-rich
future. Please donate if you haven't already -- even $5 from enough people will add up! =)" by
anonymous
*"thanks for opening my eyes to this great planet and its inhabitants" by anonymous
*"wikimedia is the seed of the New Enlightenment" by Jonathan Mayer
*"Wikipedia gets a big hug from a grad-schooler. I want to have wiki-babies with this website.
Kudos and mega-thanks." by anonymous
*"Indispensable!" by Steve Reseigh
-- Daniel Mayer
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com