[Foundation-l] Advertisements?

[Todd Allen]

On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Geoffrey Plourde <geo.plrd at yahoo.com> wrote:
> How many times does this have to be pounded home? If you put ads in WP or any other project, there would be a fork. Look at the Spanish WP if you don't believe me. However why don't we look at a opt in adsense skin?
>
>
>
>
>  ----- Original Message ----
>  From: Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com>
>  To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>  Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 1:23:32 PM
>  Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Advertisements?
>
>
>
> To answer White Cat: an encyclopedia that efficiently and effectively
>  accomplishes its mission - not simply maintenance of the status quo.
>
>  The ultimate goal is not "longterm web hosting of a web based encyclopedia"
>  its "distribute the sum of human knowledge, free, to all people." Its a big
>  vision, and its apparent that the big vision is not shared by all who
>  contribute - many construe only the narrow responsibility of keeping the
>  lights on. There is far more that can and should be done, and Wikimedia is
>  in a unique position to go much, much further towards accomplishing such a
>  broad goal than we are now. A hundred Wikimedia Academies, conferences at
>  universities around the world to involve content experts in specific fields,
>  the fast and responsive development of new features, etc. There are many,
>  many other worthy ideas that deserve consideration and attention from those
>  who can provide serious support. If we wanted to have that capacity, we
>  could have it.
>
>  The single most important aspect of the revenue impact from advertising
>  would be the preservation of Wikimedia and its projects for the duration -
>  right now, each year is a question that we rely on individual donors to
>  answer. Its just not necessary - when we have the tools to guarantee
>  Wikimedia survives and pursues its missions for decades to come, why do we
>  let it hang on the precipice year after year instead?
>
>  I honestly do not understand the point of view that any ads in articlespace
>  whatsoever immediately compromises all of our content. I don't even see
>  evidence to reflect the notion that all of our contributors will immediately
>  fork. I think the prospect of a severe fork of the English Wikipedia is
>  rather slim, to tell you the truth, and any fork would immediately become
>  obscure and useless for most purposes. What is the difficulty with
>  distinguishing between "content" and "stuff alongside content"? All of our
>  readers do this effortlessly throughout their day - in fact, a significant
>  portion of them probably think there already are ads somewhere on Wikipedia.
>  The reactionary opposition to advertising in any form needs to stop - it is
>  uninformed, because no comprehensive investigation of what is involved and
>  what the community thinks has ever been performed. It claims the authority
>  of a majority where no evidence of such majority exists. At least permit the
>  Board and staff to look into the possibility without demanding a preemptive
>  statement that advertising is evil. Something that hurts no one, does not
>  negatively impact our actual content or our community and ensures the
>  survival and expansion of Wikimedia is not evil on its face.
>
>  Nathan
>
>
>  On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 3:56 PM, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko at gmail.com>
>
> wrote:
>
>  > What kind of an encyclopedia advertises Toyoto on an article on Ford or
>  > vice
>  > versa?
>  >
>
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 7:07 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/googles-thin-skinned-lawyers/index.html
>  > >
>  > > From Google Ads terms of service:
>  > >
>  > > "5. Prohibited Uses. You shall not, and shall not authorize or
>  > > encourage any third party to:
>  > > …
>  > > (xi) engage in any action or practice that reflects poorly on Google
>  > > or otherwise disparages or devalues Google's reputation or goodwill."
>  > >
>  > > So much for NPOV.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > - d.
>  > >
>  > > _______________________________________________
>
> > > foundation-l mailing list
>  > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  > >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > foundation-l mailing list
>  > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  >
>  _______________________________________________
>  foundation-l mailing list
>  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
>       ____________________________________________________________________________________
>  Looking for last minute shopping deals?
>  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
>  _______________________________________________
>
>
> foundation-l mailing list
>  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

Opt-in is no trouble. (Opt-OUT would be, "no ads" should always be the
default.) Also, why couldn't one run ads on one's own personal
website, blog, etc., and donate a portion (or even all) of the revenue
to WMF, if one should so desire to provide financial support to
Wikimedia through advertising?

-- 
Freedom is the right to say that 2+2=4. From this all else follows.