Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: 2011 appeals for money
> Wikimedia Discussion > The Wikimedia Foundation
thekohser
I see that the newest WMF appeal is an attempt to appeal to wankers by illustrating the thoughts of a jagoff.

No mention of the fact that 53 cents of every donated dollar will go to things other than the Foundation's mission-fulfilling program services.
dogbiscuit
QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 14th October 2011, 3:37pm) *

I see that the newest WMF appeal is an attempt to appeal to wankers by illustrating the thoughts of a jagoff.

No mention of the fact that 53 cents of every donated dollar will go to things other than the Foundation's mission-fulfilling program services.


QUOTE

Where your donation goes
Technology: Servers, bandwidth, maintenance, development. Wikipedia is the #5 website in the world, and it runs on a fraction of what other top websites spend
People: The other top 10 websites have thousands of employees. We have fewer than 100, making your donation a great investment in a highly-efficient not-for-profit organization

Fraudulent misrepresentation? In the UK, to make an misleading statement with the intent to obtain money is a criminal offence.
thekohser
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Fri 14th October 2011, 10:47am) *

QUOTE

...it runs on a fraction of what other top websites spend
People: The other top 10 websites have thousands of employees. We have fewer than 100...

Fraudulent misrepresentation? In the UK, to make an misleading statement with the intent to obtain money is a criminal offence.


"Other" top 10 websites also generate tens of millions, hundreds of millions, or billions of dollars for shareholders each year. The Wikimedia Foundation generates a few million dollars to pay this lucky staff that largely sits back while volunteers do most of the work that brings Wikipedia its value.

Here is a similar and factual statement:

Wikipedia Review has one part-time owner-employee. Its website runs on $480 per year. The site serves over 30,000 unique visitors every month. Valero has 20,000 employees. It spends over $250 million per month to operate. Yet, its Valero.com website receives far fewer visitors than does Wikipedia Review.com. Therefore, your contribution to Wikipedia Review is a great investment in a highly-efficient for-profit organization.
EricBarbour
QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 14th October 2011, 11:51am) *

"Other" top 10 websites also generate tens of millions, hundreds of millions, or billions of dollars for shareholders each year. The Wikimedia Foundation generates a few million dollars to pay this lucky staff that largely sits back while volunteers do most of the work that brings Wikipedia its value.

Insane and idiotic volunteers. Some of whom use bots to generate fake "content".....
melloden
QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 14th October 2011, 6:51pm) *

QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Fri 14th October 2011, 10:47am) *

QUOTE

...it runs on a fraction of what other top websites spend
People: The other top 10 websites have thousands of employees. We have fewer than 100...

Fraudulent misrepresentation? In the UK, to make an misleading statement with the intent to obtain money is a criminal offence.


"Other" top 10 websites also generate tens of millions, hundreds of millions, or billions of dollars for shareholders each year. The Wikimedia Foundation generates a few million dollars to pay this lucky staff that largely sits back while volunteers do most of the work that brings Wikipedia its value.

Here is a similar and factual statement:

Wikipedia Review has one part-time owner-employee. Its website runs on $480 per year. The site serves over 30,000 unique visitors every month. Valero has 20,000 employees. It spends over $250 million per month to operate. Yet, its Valero.com website receives far fewer visitors than does Wikipedia Review.com. Therefore, your contribution to Wikipedia Review is a great investment in a highly-efficient for-profit organization.

Except one would argue that Valero achieves more than your website does, because Valero is not primarily a web-based company. Efficiency isn't everything.
mbz1
QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 14th October 2011, 2:37pm) *

I see that the newest WMF appeal is an attempt to appeal to wankers by illustrating the thoughts of a jagoff.

No mention of the fact that 53 cents of every donated dollar will go to things other than the Foundation's mission-fulfilling program services.


This particular appeal is actually quite disgusting.To me it just does not sound right. I am surprised it was allowed at all. dry.gif
QUOTE
Wikipedia’s corporate office is located in Jimmy Wales’ basement, right next to an over-sized water heater. They keep one of the most important ventures in the world running every day and night, besides Thursdays, because that’s when Jimmy’s roommate, Big Mike, has poker night.

Okay, that’s an exaggeration, but not a huge one. Wikipedia is an impossibly small operation performing an impossibly large job.

Did you know that fewer people work at Wikipedia than Google has at their Saint-Ghislain data center alone?


What Google and its employees have to do with Wikipedia? Google does not ask for the donations, Google provides employment for thousands.


BTW could you please tell me, where this data comes from, I mean this 53 cents number.
Also do we know how much money WMF employees make. How much money are spent to pay they travel expenses. I mean we know that Steve Jobs was making $1 per year, what about WMF employees.
Looch
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sat 15th October 2011, 10:06pm) *
could you please tell me, where this data comes from, I mean this 53 cents number.


Seconded. I'm not saying I don't believe it. I'm just wondering where it comes from.
powercorrupts
I'm not happy with them asking for £2/3/5/10-plus bank card monlthly Direct Debits, especially as the 'default' setting, while you are asked to a box to make the "one off donation". Charities essentially compete for people's DD money in the UK (they all ask for a few quid a month - and of course most of those who do it will only do one or two), and it really feels like the WMF are competing for our money now. How are they a bloody charity other than as a tax loophole? It's just so dodgy.

Incidentally I haven't seen any banner ads this year, at least in the UK. I know they had criticism last year for over-exposing his alpha 'look at me' face, but Wales has spun that around as him being told by his staff that they make more money when his image is up there (ie they talked him into doing it). If his face really is the reason for increased donating (and it doesn't necessarily follow that it is) - it is scary in many ways of course.
thekohser
Just thought I'd point out that (as of this morning), more than once every 3 minutes (on average) someone new is visiting the "Top 10 Reasons Not to Donate to Wikipedia" page.

They're coming from Germany, the Czech Republic, India, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Australia, the United States, and Pakistan -- and that's just a sample of the most recent 20 visitors.

They're searching Google for things like:
  • is it correct to donate money for wikipedia? (Google India, #5 result)
  • wikipedia donation statistics (Google, #2 result)
  • donating to wikipedia (Google UK, #7 result)
  • how much money did wikipedia received from donations (Google, #4 result)
  • how many people donate to wikipedia (Google Sweden, #1 result)
  • donations to wikipedia (Google Singapore, #2 result)

With this much traffic and search engine exposure, do we think it would be worth improving on the landing page? How so?
Peter Damian
QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 16th November 2011, 7:46pm) *

Just thought I'd point out that (as of this morning), more than once every 3 minutes (on average) someone new is visiting the "Top 10 Reasons Not to Donate to Wikipedia" page.

They're coming from Germany, the Czech Republic, India, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Australia, the United States, and Pakistan -- and that's just a sample of the most recent 20 visitors.

They're searching Google for things like:
  • is it correct to donate money for wikipedia? (Google India, #5 result)
  • wikipedia donation statistics (Google, #2 result)
  • donating to wikipedia (Google UK, #7 result)
  • how much money did wikipedia received from donations (Google, #4 result)
  • how many people donate to wikipedia (Google Sweden, #1 result)
  • donations to wikipedia (Google Singapore, #2 result)
With this much traffic and search engine exposure, do we think it would be worth improving on the landing page? How so?


Yes I notice if you google 'donate to Wikipedia' or similar, that page and a number of other 'anti' pages come up. I'll try a few linking experiments this weekend.


QUOTE

With this much traffic and search engine exposure, do we think it would be worth improving on the landing page? How so?


I read it again and some of it (particularly the stuff lower down, e.g. the picture of the magician holding the tied up girl) is a bit strident. At least to my conservative English tastes. We have argued about this before, I know.

QUOTE

This page is viewed by 25 different people per hour, on average, during the Wikimedia Foundation fundraising season. Thanks to excellent search engine rankings for the page, it is hoped that at least some of the readers who visit will be dissuaded from adding their donation to the Wikimedia money machine.


Why do people who have landed on this page need to know that 24 other people have landed that hour? 'The Wikipedia money machine' is crass and over the top.

QUOTE

Wikimedia Foundation finances are suspect


That whole section is great. However, you are not hitting those who are landing on the page with the key point that 'wikipedia' (P) is different from wikimedia' (M). Might be worth pointing that out. Also, there are many people on the net who are inherently suspicious of phishing sites which exploit naming ambiguities. Simply pointing out that the two enterprises are different will engage that suspicion.

QUOTE

Wikipedia has too much power.


That's a good point, may be lost on the general populace. Needs an example or a word picture.

QUOTE

Your donation will indirectly fund Wikia, Inc., which is not a charity.


The section makes a good point, but somewhat wordy. From then on, it's just too many words. I would suggest shortening it and addressing the key points.

This page is an important weapon in the armoury. Too good to be wasted. Well done.



EricBarbour
I would tend to agree with Peter, that page is valuable, and the easier it is to read and understand,
the more impact it will have. I'd be happy to provide some quotes if you wish.
thekohser
The "10 Reasons Not" page is now up to 50 unique visitors per hour, which is about double yesterday's traffic.

I see that some of it is due to a Reddit post. Upvote time!
thekohser
I wonder if the Wikimedia Foundation ever considered keeping the appeals off of certain pages, or would that be the dreaded censorship?
thekohser
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Thu 17th November 2011, 1:51pm) *


Somebody's on the fast track to Bannsville:

QUOTE
Jorm, you are traveling to India? May I please ask you, who pays for your travel expenses, and how necessarily it is to travel to India versus having a conference via internet communications?
One more question. In your appeal for donations you have never mentioned thousands upon thousands of volunteers, who make wikipedia possible. Why? Thanks.--Mbz1 19:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
mbz1
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 17th November 2011, 7:54pm) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Thu 17th November 2011, 1:51pm) *


Somebody's on the fast track to Bannsville:

QUOTE
Jorm, you are traveling to India? May I please ask you, who pays for your travel expenses, and how necessarily it is to travel to India versus having a conference via internet communications?
One more question. In your appeal for donations you have never mentioned thousands upon thousands of volunteers, who make wikipedia possible. Why? Thanks.--Mbz1 19:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


Not yet banned, but got a scream hrmph.gif from WMF employee:
QUOTE
Mbz1, I can't begin to relate to why you would make this kind of absurd insinuation. Or why you would feel it's OK to do so from behind a veil of anonymity. I also can't imagine what would make you voluntarily request that your account be blocked from editing Wikipedia, and yet return to Meta to stir shit up about Wikipedia.
Maybe there are good reasons for all of that, but you know what? I don't care. I can't imagine I'm the only one who feels like that. -Pete F 03:46, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


One is left to wonder, if this guy realizes that his response to my so called "absurd insinuation" stirs shit up about Wikipedia" ten times more that all my questions combined. confused.gif

I was also going to ask who's going to pay for Jimbo's every fortnight flights to Florida to see his daughter from his second marriage", but now I believe I am going to miss on this one. biggrin.gif
In any case WMF would probably save some money, if this third marriage of Jimbo would be the happy last one. smile.gif
Alison
Then there's this, from The Oatmeal blink.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
EricBarbour
QUOTE(Alison @ Thu 17th November 2011, 9:21pm) *
Then there's this, from The Oatmeal blink.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

There was a similar thread on /b/ the other day.

All this adds up to one thing: Wikipedia isn't as "magical" as it used to be. The more they beg
pathetically for donations, the more people dislike them--and Wales.
EricBarbour
In case you missed it: Sergey Brin and wife
just gave them $500,000.

(Read the comments below that story. Seems to be typical nowadays.)
Peter Damian
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sat 19th November 2011, 5:53am) *

(Read the comments below that story. Seems to be typical nowadays.)


I read your comment and thought the worst - it will be the usual fawning crap about bringing knowledge to all of humanity, vomit. But it wasn't. People are actually wondering why it costs that much to run a bunch of servers.
thekohser
Wow, what an excellent comment:

QUOTE
If that's half for staff and half for servers, it's $20k per server and $147k per person.


Somebody's able to do the math and see through the bullshit.
mbz1
Today's banner states:
QUOTE
If everyone reading this donated $10,
we could end the fundraiser today.
Please read a personal appeal.
Please help

Yesterday Jimbo begged for only $5, and promised to end the fundraising today,
"if everyone reading this donated $5" and so on.

So what happened? Airfare got more expensive? biggrin.gif

But jokes aside, this banner is really annoying and misleading, and hard to close. It has a button "please help", but no matter where one is to click inside this banner (including but not limited to Jimbos's image itself) , it will take one to the donation page. The only expedition is a small "x" in the right upper corner. If you'd be able to place your mouse precisely over this "x", it will close the banner.
Don't they understand that the banner that is made hard to close, will not increase the donations, but will do just the opposite? dry.gif
Looch
I was coming here to post about how $5 was being asked for the other day, and now it's $10, but it looks like I wasn't the only person who noticed and I was beaten to posting it.
thekohser
QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 16th November 2011, 2:46pm) *

Just thought I'd point out that (as of this morning), more than once every 3 minutes (on average) someone new is visiting the "Top 10 Reasons Not to Donate to Wikipedia" page.

They're coming from Germany, the Czech Republic, India, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Australia, the United States, and Pakistan -- and that's just a sample of the most recent 20 visitors.

They're searching Google for things like:
  • is it correct to donate money for wikipedia? (Google India, #5 result)
  • wikipedia donation statistics (Google, #2 result)
  • donating to wikipedia (Google UK, #7 result)
  • how much money did wikipedia received from donations (Google, #4 result)
  • how many people donate to wikipedia (Google Sweden, #1 result)
  • donations to wikipedia (Google Singapore, #2 result)
With this much traffic and search engine exposure, do we think it would be worth improving on the landing page? How so?


Getting some love from the Vietnamese gamer community now.
mbz1
QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 23rd November 2011, 4:01am) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 16th November 2011, 2:46pm) *

Just thought I'd point out that (as of this morning), more than once every 3 minutes (on average) someone new is visiting the "Top 10 Reasons Not to Donate to Wikipedia" page.

They're coming from Germany, the Czech Republic, India, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Australia, the United States, and Pakistan -- and that's just a sample of the most recent 20 visitors.

They're searching Google for things like:
  • is it correct to donate money for wikipedia? (Google India, #5 result)
  • wikipedia donation statistics (Google, #2 result)
  • donating to wikipedia (Google UK, #7 result)
  • how much money did wikipedia received from donations (Google, #4 result)
  • how many people donate to wikipedia (Google Sweden, #1 result)
  • donations to wikipedia (Google Singapore, #2 result)
With this much traffic and search engine exposure, do we think it would be worth improving on the landing page? How so?


Getting some love from the Vietnamese gamer community now.

It is one great image!
I could not have missed on linking to it smile.gif
Looch
Jimmy Wales is getting complaints on his twitter about the donation ads. Three out of his five most recent tweets are responding to messages about it. In each case, he says to click the "x" to get rid of it.
UseOnceAndDestroy
QUOTE(Looch @ Sun 27th November 2011, 11:54pm) *

he says to click the "x" to get rid of it.


Using your favourite ad blocker to prevent retrieval of any URL containing "title=special:bannercontroller" is way more effective. Pass it on.
Kelly Martin
QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 19th November 2011, 6:46am) *

Wow, what an excellent comment:

QUOTE
If that's half for staff and half for servers, it's $20k per server and $147k per person.


Somebody's able to do the math and see through the bullshit.
It's more like a third for servers, a third for staff, and a third for transit costs. But the point remains.
Cla68
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Mon 28th November 2011, 5:44pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 19th November 2011, 6:46am) *

Wow, what an excellent comment:

QUOTE
If that's half for staff and half for servers, it's $20k per server and $147k per person.


Somebody's able to do the math and see through the bullshit.
It's more like a third for servers, a third for staff, and a third for transit costs. But the point remains.


Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?
mbz1
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 12:28am) *



Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?


Why don't you ask this question on wiki, at jimbo's page for example?
You could also ask jimbo how many of his every two weeks flights from London to Florida are processed as business trips, and are paid by WMF biggrin.gif
Cla68
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 1:52am) *

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 12:28am) *



Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?


Why don't you ask this question on wiki, at jimbo's page for example?
You could also ask jimbo how many of his every two weeks flights from London to Florida are processed as business trips, and are paid by WMF biggrin.gif


I believe Jimbo always flies first class, and it would be really, really audacious of him to charge that to the WMF. I'm more curious about what class Ms Gardner, Mr Möller, and other WMF executives travel in (business or economy), how much staff/assistants they take with them, what hotels they stay in (for example, if they have a choice between a Sheraton and a Four Seasons, which do they choose?), and the like.
mbz1
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 4:30am) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 1:52am) *

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 12:28am) *



Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?


Why don't you ask this question on wiki, at jimbo's page for example?
You could also ask jimbo how many of his every two weeks flights from London to Florida are processed as business trips, and are paid by WMF biggrin.gif


I believe Jimbo always flies first class, and it would be really, really audacious of him to charge that to the WMF. I'm more curious about what class Ms Gardner, Mr Möller, and other WMF executives travel in (business or economy), how much staff/assistants they take with them, what hotels they stay in (for example, if they have a choice between a Sheraton and a Four Seasons, which do they choose?), and the like.

Well, I am not sure you read it in the beginning of this thread, but I asked a WMF employee who pays for his trip to a conference to India and how necessarily was it to fly to India in a first place versus using Internet for this conference. He's never responded, but I did get a scream hrmph.gif from a former WMF employee.
I even cannot be angry with this idiot, who is a former WMF employee and a current WP admin Peteforsyth (T-C-L-K-R-D) , and who believes that asking a question who's paying for WMF employee trip is "an absurd insinuation"? Isn't it sad that he believes that asking these simple questions means "to stir shit up about Wikipedia"?
EricBarbour
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Mon 28th November 2011, 4:28pm) *

Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?

Nope. Just a single figure on each annual report. (Page 5 here.)

For 2011 they claim $1,159,200, which is more than twice the expenses in 2010.
That would buy a lot of first-class tickets and $1000/night hotel rooms.

You should be angrier.
Cla68
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 29th November 2011, 5:44am) *

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Mon 28th November 2011, 4:28pm) *

Does the WMF publish full accountings of its travel costs, such as what class of seat its employees fly on, which hotels they stay at, how much per diem they get, etc?

Nope. Just a single figure on each annual report. (Page 5 here.)

For 2011 they claim $1,159,200, which is more than twice the expenses in 2010.
That would buy a lot of first-class tickets and $1000/night hotel rooms.

You should be angrier.


Based on what I've observed, travel expenses can get inflated really fast if there isn't sufficient oversight. Travelers renting the SUV instead of the compact car, lodging in the Shangri-la instead of the Hilton, choosing to fly a Singapore airlines non-stop instead of United with a three-hour layover, claiming full per diem for the day you arrive back home, etc.

I don't know if WMF employees are doing this. I suspect that they're simply traveling more and taking more people on each trip. I guess I should ask them for their detailed travel expenses record.

That is telling that one of them reacted so defensively to Mbz1's question. If they're sensitive about travel expenses, then someone needs to look into it.
mbz1
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 4:30am) *



I believe Jimbo always flies first class, and it would be really, really audacious of him to charge that to the WMF.


I have a silly question. If Jimbo could afford flying first class, why he himself does not donate to Wikipedia? Or maybe he does, but I could not find his name in the list of sustaining Donors
Kelly Martin
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 1:10pm) *
I have a silly question. If Jimbo could afford flying first class, why he himself does not donate to Wikipedia? Or maybe he does, but I could not find his name in the list of sustaining Donors
Silly puppy. Jimmy donates his time to Wikimedia. Why should he also donate money?
mbz1
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Tue 29th November 2011, 7:51pm) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 1:10pm) *
I have a silly question. If Jimbo could afford flying first class, why he himself does not donate to Wikipedia? Or maybe he does, but I could not find his name in the list of sustaining Donors
Silly puppy. Jimmy donates his time to Wikimedia. Why should he also donate money?

Well, if for nothing else simply because a mention of his own donations would have sounded nice in his appeal for donations. It is like learning by example, is it not? I am sure more people would have donated to Wikipedia, if they saw Jimbo did too.
thekohser
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 2:56pm) *

QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Tue 29th November 2011, 7:51pm) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 29th November 2011, 1:10pm) *
I have a silly question. If Jimbo could afford flying first class, why he himself does not donate to Wikipedia? Or maybe he does, but I could not find his name in the list of sustaining Donors
Silly puppy. Jimmy donates his time to Wikimedia. Why should he also donate money?

Well, if for nothing else simply because a mention of his own donations would have sounded nice in his appeal for donations. It is like learning by example, is it not? I am sure more people would have donated to Wikipedia, if they saw Jimbo did too.


I suppose Gil Penchina would rather see Jimbo pay off the $30,000 loan Jimbo owes Gil, before any big personal checks are written to the Wikimedia Foundation.
thekohser
Anybody know how the current fundraiser is actually doing? The Foundation doesn't seem to have generated any reports on it yet, or else I'm looking for stats in all the wrong places.
thekohser
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 1st December 2011, 6:51am) *

Anybody know how the current fundraiser is actually doing? The Foundation doesn't seem to have generated any reports on it yet, or else I'm looking for stats in all the wrong places.


It appears that if you want to find out how much the WMF is raking in this year, you would go here. Of course, neither of those reports provides any value to the reader whatsoever, given that each of them returns the following message:

QUOTE
This page has been temporarily disabled due to high volume. Please try again later.


So, apparently, our long-haired smiley-face code developer Brandon Harris is also sort of responsible for breaking the fundraiser's statistical reports, thanks to his celebrity moment on Reddit.
mbz1
QUOTE(thekohser @ Sun 4th December 2011, 4:17pm) *


So, apparently, our long-haired smiley-face code developer Brandon Harris is also sort of responsible for breaking the fundraiser's statistical reports, thanks to his celebrity moment on Reddit.


Actually our "our long-haired smiley-face code developer" was compared to Rasputin
QUOTE
Oh Wikipedia programmer Brandon Harris, how we’ve become accustomed to your glaring visage, all but commanding us to donate money to Wikipedia with the wild hair and crazy eyes of a modern day Rasputin.
and now you could see him randomly at any page that has nothing to do with wikipedia.
QUOTE
Simply install the ProgrammerAppeal extension and wait for Harris to randomly pop up on your browser. It’s like that time a strung-out metalhead kept following you after the Iron Maiden concert, except this time it’s on the internet.




thekohser
Cute and spunky Megan Hernandez is keeping us posted on the fundraiser. Once again, it looks like a record-setting success.

(Here's Megan chowing down on some wiener schnitzel
on a WMF-paid tour of Europe.)
Cla68
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 5th December 2011, 2:43pm) *

Cute and spunky Megan Hernandez is keeping us posted on the fundraiser. Once again, it looks like a record-setting success.

(Here's Megan chowing down on some wiener schnitzel
on a WMF-paid tour of Europe.)


If they were paid per diem for the trip that may be one reason they appear so happy in the photo, although the food and drink does look tasty.
Viridae
QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 18th November 2011, 1:36am) *

The "10 Reasons Not" page is now up to 50 unique visitors per hour, which is about double yesterday's traffic.

I see that some of it is due to a Reddit post. Upvote time!


Oh hello there!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.