Bitcoin Forum

Bitcoin => Bitcoin Discussion => Topic started by: DGulari on December 06, 2014, 11:29:56 PM



Title: Wikipedia
Post by: DGulari on December 06, 2014, 11:29:56 PM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.
https://i.imgur.com/U1tD8dv.jpg


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: qxzn on December 07, 2014, 12:01:48 AM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.
https://i.imgur.com/U1tD8dv.jpg

you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: DGulari on December 07, 2014, 12:07:56 AM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.


you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?
That might be true, but they build their donation page as if they don't.  So in effect, they don't.  In other words, their user interface if very bitcoin unfriendly - even if they will accept bitcoin in some other medium.  They need a QR code on that page or people can easily donate in bitcoin without searching around for 30 minutes.  I am giving nothing.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: qxzn on December 07, 2014, 12:10:51 AM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.


you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?
That might be true, but they build their donation page as if they don't.  So in effect, they don't.  In other words, their user interface if very bitcoin unfriendly - even if they will accept bitcoin in some other medium.  They need a QR code on that page or people can easily donate in bitcoin without searching around for 30 minutes.  I am giving nothing.

They use a coinbase payment processing widget. I find it somewhat annoying that it asks for personal information, probably for some legal reason. There's no reason you can't put fake info into their form though.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: DGulari on December 07, 2014, 12:21:37 AM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.


you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?
That might be true, but they build their donation page as if they don't.  So in effect, they don't.  In other words, their user interface if very bitcoin unfriendly - even if they will accept bitcoin in some other medium.  They need a QR code on that page or people can easily donate in bitcoin without searching around for 30 minutes.  I am giving nothing.

They use a coinbase payment processing widget. I find it somewhat annoying that it asks for personal information, probably for some legal reason. There's no reason you can't put fake info into their form though.

This indicates further Wikipedia doesn't understand bitcoin.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: 1Referee on December 07, 2014, 12:42:29 AM
If you search for wikipedia donation you'll see the first page http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Ways_to_Give

They listed Bitcoin along with the other payment options.

It's a shame that we need to fill in so many details just to donate a few bucks.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: DGulari on December 07, 2014, 12:45:55 AM
It's a shame that we need to fill in so many details just to donate a few bucks.
This indicates further that Wikipedia simply doesn't understand Bitcoin.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: FunnyHat43 on December 07, 2014, 01:05:59 AM
It's a shame that we need to fill in so many details just to donate a few bucks.
This indicates further that Wikipedia simply doesn't understand Bitcoin.
While you do not need to reveal yourself as part of the Bitcoin protocol they may need your personal information for some kind of compliance purpose (to comply with some law or regulation). I am not 100% sure what kind of "chairity" wikipedia is (what part of the tax code they fall under) however if donations are tax deductible they will need your information so they can give you a tax form so you can receive a tax deduction for your donation


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: JimboToronto on December 07, 2014, 03:13:40 AM
I tried to tell them to post a Bitcoin address last year during a donation campaign. Shame on them for not providing one.

I'd love to make an anonymous Bitcoin donation because I appreciate the service they provide and the worldwide cooperative nature of Wikipedia content.

Their loss.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: Krona Rev on December 07, 2014, 06:57:59 AM
It's a shame that we need to fill in so many details just to donate a few bucks.
This indicates further that Wikipedia simply doesn't understand Bitcoin.

I agree, but I try to be more positive about it. When an organization like Wikipedia asks for identifying information, that's their way of letting me know that the organization is run by evil people. That's useful information to have when deciding where to make donations.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: jubalix on December 07, 2014, 07:03:01 AM
until BTC button is on the donate page it does not count.

How one earth they don't do this is beyond me. It goes agaisnt the ethos of everything they should stand for, plus they are just being dicks about it, which is far worse


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: TippingPoint on December 07, 2014, 06:04:39 PM
"To protect our independance, we'll never run adds"

To protect my independance, I won't give you my name.



Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: LiteCoinGuy on December 07, 2014, 06:12:59 PM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.


you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?
That might be true, but they build their donation page as if they don't.  So in effect, they don't.  In other words, their user interface if very bitcoin unfriendly - even if they will accept bitcoin in some other medium.  They need a QR code on that page or people can easily donate in bitcoin without searching around for 30 minutes.  I am giving nothing.

yeap, true.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/20/cash_rich_wikipedia_chugging/


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: exoton on December 07, 2014, 10:41:40 PM
"To protect our independance, we'll never run adds"

To protect my independance, I won't give you my name.


As mentioned above, it is possible they collect your name (among other information) so you can receive a tax deduction the following April when you file you taxes. I would think that most people would likely want to take advantage of such tax breaks.

Additionally, from what I can tell they do not check your identity information for accuracy, so there is nothing to prevent you from saying your name is "John Doe" who lives at "123 Main street"


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: shawshankinmate37927 on December 07, 2014, 10:57:55 PM
That might be true, but they build their donation page as if they don't.  So in effect, they don't.  In other words, their user interface if very bitcoin unfriendly - even if they will accept bitcoin in some other medium.  They need a QR code on that page or people can easily donate in bitcoin without searching around for 30 minutes.  I am giving nothing.

yeap, true.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/20/cash_rich_wikipedia_chugging/

Hmmm... Perhaps thay aren't terribly interested in the kind of transparency that Bitcoin allows for.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: 1Referee on December 07, 2014, 11:00:22 PM
"To protect our independance, we'll never run adds"

To protect my independance, I won't give you my name.


As mentioned above, it is possible they collect your name (among other information) so you can receive a tax deduction the following April when you file you taxes. I would think that most people would likely want to take advantage of such tax breaks.

Additionally, from what I can tell they do not check your identity information for accuracy, so there is nothing to prevent you from saying your name is "John Doe" who lives at "123 Main street"

I wonder why Mozilla doesn't require anyone to fill in so many details.

They only ask for your email address.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: exoton on December 08, 2014, 01:46:28 AM
"To protect our independance, we'll never run adds"

To protect my independance, I won't give you my name.


As mentioned above, it is possible they collect your name (among other information) so you can receive a tax deduction the following April when you file you taxes. I would think that most people would likely want to take advantage of such tax breaks.

Additionally, from what I can tell they do not check your identity information for accuracy, so there is nothing to prevent you from saying your name is "John Doe" who lives at "123 Main street"

I wonder why Mozilla doesn't require anyone to fill in so many details.

They only ask for your email address.
They are probably classified as different kinds of charities under the IRS tax code. Only charities that meet certain criteria can allow donors to deduct donations on their taxes.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: shorena on December 08, 2014, 07:16:54 AM
until BTC button is on the donate page it does not count.

How one earth they don't do this is beyond me. It goes agaisnt the ethos of everything they should stand for, plus they are just being dicks about it, which is far worse

Took me 10 seconds (on a modern browser), if you dont want to give, dont.

https://i.imgur.com/8cbAoeQ.png


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: e4xit on December 08, 2014, 11:31:51 AM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.
https://i.imgur.com/U1tD8dv.jpg

Nice respectable, modern web browser, guy.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: newIndia on December 08, 2014, 11:38:46 AM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.


If u r bothered about look & feel, u might try http://www.wikiwand.com.

By the way, the parent organization of Wikipedia, The Wikimedia Foundation do accept bitcoin.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: guybrushthreepwood on December 08, 2014, 12:17:18 PM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.


you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?
That might be true, but they build their donation page as if they don't.  So in effect, they don't.  In other words, their user interface if very bitcoin unfriendly - even if they will accept bitcoin in some other medium.  They need a QR code on that page or people can easily donate in bitcoin without searching around for 30 minutes.  I am giving nothing.

Lol, seriously? They accept it and that's good enough. What do you want? A massive flashing bitcoin logo on their homescreen? Something tells me you wouldn't actually donate to wikipedia anyway so it's probably irrelevant.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: Krona Rev on December 08, 2014, 02:43:34 PM
"To protect our independence, we'll never run ads"

To protect my independence, I won't give you my name.

Kudos. Excellent response.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: zyzzbrah on December 08, 2014, 03:08:16 PM
"To protect our independance, we'll never run adds"

To protect my independance, I won't give you my name.


do yo need to give your name if you make a btc donation??


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: ChuckBuck on December 08, 2014, 03:47:18 PM
Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:

https://i.imgur.com/94uMCi1.png

Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

At least other non profits like Mozilla, United Way, and Tor Project are more accessible and require less info when donating Bitcoin to them:

http://www.unitedway.org/pages/donate-bitcoin-to-united-way

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: mikewirth on December 08, 2014, 05:18:47 PM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.


you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?
That might be true, but they build their donation page as if they don't.  So in effect, they don't.  In other words, their user interface if very bitcoin unfriendly - even if they will accept bitcoin in some other medium.  They need a QR code on that page or people can easily donate in bitcoin without searching around for 30 minutes.  I am giving nothing.

Lol, seriously? They accept it and that's good enough. What do you want? A massive flashing bitcoin logo on their homescreen? Something tells me you wouldn't actually donate to wikipedia anyway so it's probably irrelevant.
What?  Are you stupid?  If it is very hard to use and to find the donation page buried deep in some tree structure with shitty interfaces, which don't work - you still say 'they accept bitcoin'?  Nobody will use bitcoin if it isn't easy to use and promenantly displayed.  fuck Wikipedia - most of that site is all trash anyway.  Don't donate.  Maybe we can choke them off and a new site will come along.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: rgenito on December 09, 2014, 06:31:15 PM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.
https://i.imgur.com/U1tD8dv.jpg

you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?

sure, they allow bitcoins... but what's up with BLATANTLY not showing bitcoin as a payment option? seriously. that's just uncalled for. And this is exactly why I continue to deliberately *not* support wikipedia until they get their act together.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: freedomno1 on December 09, 2014, 07:55:14 PM
I tried to tell them to post a Bitcoin address last year during a donation campaign. Shame on them for not providing one.

I'd love to make an anonymous Bitcoin donation because I appreciate the service they provide and the worldwide cooperative nature of Wikipedia content.

Their loss.

In agreement if I cannot retain the option to maintain my pseudoanonyminity when making a donation to some group or organization then it is their loss.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: EnFinlay on December 10, 2014, 03:14:18 AM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.
https://i.imgur.com/U1tD8dv.jpg

Nice respectable, modern web browser, guy.

I like you.  Carry on.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: Bitcoins101 on December 10, 2014, 05:46:43 AM
Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:

https://i.imgur.com/94uMCi1.png

Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

At least other non profits like Mozilla, United Way, and Tor Project are more accessible and require less info when donating Bitcoin to them:

http://www.unitedway.org/pages/donate-bitcoin-to-united-way

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate

Bitcoin was never meant to be truly anonymous.

Wikipedia is the worst website on the Internet you could donate to.


Wikipedia is a "non-profit" website that puts real businesses out of business. They have effectively cornered the online information market and instead of using advertising-based models (which create revenue from the non-enthusiast users), they ask the enthusiast users (who already contribute countless hours of work maintaining pages) for donations.

A few years ago I ran a very large online forum. All revenue was ad revenue. I disabled all ads for all registered users, because they're already contributing content to the site - you don't need to take their money, too. Instead, I let people who were not contributing by posting (unregistered users) contribute financially by littering the site with advertisements for them.

I strongly feel that this is the correct way to run a business (or even a nonprofit website), rather than ask your very best members to contribute money. Wikipedia should partner with Google's advertising and serve advertisements to all non-contributors. Google already puts them #1 for every search term (which pushes the informational sites on specific topics from real enthusiasts out of business), so it would only be natural.

If you want to donate to a site in that space, I'd recommend archive.org (https://archive.org/). The primary monetary contributors are going to be the users who utilize the resources they provide the most extensively, so asking for donations seems reasonable in their case.

Tails is okay and probably more worthy than archive.org. However, there are lower-funded privacy and anonymity projects you can contribute to that don't constantly have security holes. Properly configured TBB plus FDE is likely significantly safer than Tails.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: doof on December 10, 2014, 06:58:01 AM
Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.
https://i.imgur.com/U1tD8dv.jpg

Nice respectable, modern web browser, guy.

I like you.  Carry on.
Beaten!  Ancient site on ancient browser.  If you dont like the site, dont use it.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: exoton on December 11, 2014, 12:44:23 AM
I tried to tell them to post a Bitcoin address last year during a donation campaign. Shame on them for not providing one.

I'd love to make an anonymous Bitcoin donation because I appreciate the service they provide and the worldwide cooperative nature of Wikipedia content.

Their loss.

In agreement if I cannot retain the option to maintain my pseudoanonyminity when making a donation to some group or organization then it is their loss.
What would stop you from inputting some random information into their donation "form" when giving them money? Or even better yet, what would stop you from putting in some information that is derived from the (planned) sending address? It is my understanding they do not validate the information you give them


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: Soros Shorts on December 11, 2014, 01:46:44 AM
Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:

https://i.imgur.com/94uMCi1.png

Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: ChuckBuck on December 11, 2014, 01:39:07 PM
Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:

-snip-

Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.

Shouldn't be that way though.  Look at Tor Project:

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate.html.en

Nice and clean donate page, Bitcoin highly visible without filling a bunch of info, and email is optional.

No excuses for Wikimedia or Mozilla's archaic and convoluted Donate system.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: allthingsluxury on December 11, 2014, 03:13:50 PM
Last I read, they are accepting bitcoins, multiple people have reported this.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: botany on December 12, 2014, 02:22:38 AM
Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:

-snip-

Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.

Shouldn't be that way though.  Look at Tor Project:

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate.html.en

Nice and clean donate page, Bitcoin highly visible without filling a bunch of info, and email is optional.

No excuses for Wikimedia or Mozilla's archaic and convoluted Donate system.

This is neat.
May be we should have these guys add a link "Donate to Wikimedia/Mozilla" on their webpage, and just pass on the donations received.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: exoton on December 16, 2014, 04:36:28 AM
Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:

https://i.imgur.com/94uMCi1.png

Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.
I guess some people are just too stubborn about wanting privacy to even consider using bitcoin with something that even asks for your personal information


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: pawel7777 on December 16, 2014, 10:14:01 AM
Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:

-snip-

Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.

Shouldn't be that way though.  Look at Tor Project:

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate.html.en

Nice and clean donate page, Bitcoin highly visible without filling a bunch of info, and email is optional.

No excuses for Wikimedia or Mozilla's archaic and convoluted Donate system.

OK, so now tell me how do I get proper receipt (for tax purpose) from TOR when I send donations without submitting any details?

Wikimedia's not TOR's donation option is done properly. You want a tax deduction, you get the receipt hassle free. You want to stay anonymous, just type "John Doe", it's not that hard, is it?


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: MountainOfCoins on December 16, 2014, 01:55:35 PM
Whats the problem? They'r accepting bitcoin, and I can confirm this... And they really deserve appreciation, since they'r really making the world better, and represent one of the most successful projects ever powered by a community.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: superresistant on December 16, 2014, 03:08:06 PM
 
I agree with OP. Wikipedia is a fucking coward for not adding the Bitcoin donation button on the front donation page.
I know that they are accepting it if you do some research BUT why hiding it ??
It means that they are ashamed of Bitcoin.
Screw them. I am ashamed of Wikipedia !



Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: pawel7777 on December 16, 2014, 03:29:15 PM
...
I know that they are accepting it if you do some research BUT why hiding it ??
...

Why? Likely for the same reasons Mozilla removed bitcoin donation button. It distracted page viewers resulting in less donations.

https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/ (https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/)

Quote
We received numerous requests from donors that they wanted bitcoin featured right on our primary donation form. Given the volume of page views to that form (millions during the life of the campaign), I was concerned that adding any unnecessary text would distract donors and depress non-bitcoin conversions, the source of more than 99% of all our campaign revenue. So we decided to add “Donate with Bitcoin” text, and test whether it depressed conversion or not. Here is what that looked like: [...]

The test showed that revenue per visitor drops by about $0.07 USD. Here is the Optimizely graph showing a 7.5% reduction in revenue per visitor:[...]


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: superresistant on December 16, 2014, 03:35:19 PM
...
I know that they are accepting it if you do some research BUT why hiding it ??
...
Why? Likely for the same reasons Mozilla removed bitcoin donation button. It distracted page viewers resulting in less donations.
https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/ (https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/)
Quote
We received numerous requests from donors that they wanted bitcoin featured right on our primary donation form. Given the volume of page views to that form (millions during the life of the campaign), I was concerned that adding any unnecessary text would distract donors and depress non-bitcoin conversions, the source of more than 99% of all our campaign revenue. So we decided to add “Donate with Bitcoin” text, and test whether it depressed conversion or not. Here is what that looked like: [...]
The test showed that revenue per visitor drops by about $0.07 USD. Here is the Optimizely graph showing a 7.5% reduction in revenue per visitor:[...]

Hmm I didn't know that.


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: exoton on December 17, 2014, 02:59:54 AM
...
I know that they are accepting it if you do some research BUT why hiding it ??
...

Why? Likely for the same reasons Mozilla removed bitcoin donation button. It distracted page viewers resulting in less donations.

https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/ (https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/)

Quote
We received numerous requests from donors that they wanted bitcoin featured right on our primary donation form. Given the volume of page views to that form (millions during the life of the campaign), I was concerned that adding any unnecessary text would distract donors and depress non-bitcoin conversions, the source of more than 99% of all our campaign revenue. So we decided to add “Donate with Bitcoin” text, and test whether it depressed conversion or not. Here is what that looked like: [...]

The test showed that revenue per visitor drops by about $0.07 USD. Here is the Optimizely graph showing a 7.5% reduction in revenue per visitor:[...]
I find it hard to believe that $0.07 is a statistically significant amount. Especially considering that most of the other payment methods involve high fees, so even if overall donations drop, the amount received by modzilla (or wikipedia) could potentially increase


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: xxxgoodgirls on December 17, 2014, 03:15:04 AM

r u using internet explorer


Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: pawel7777 on December 17, 2014, 07:33:47 AM
...
I know that they are accepting it if you do some research BUT why hiding it ??
...

Why? Likely for the same reasons Mozilla removed bitcoin donation button. It distracted page viewers resulting in less donations.

https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/ (https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/)

Quote
We received numerous requests from donors that they wanted bitcoin featured right on our primary donation form. Given the volume of page views to that form (millions during the life of the campaign), I was concerned that adding any unnecessary text would distract donors and depress non-bitcoin conversions, the source of more than 99% of all our campaign revenue. So we decided to add “Donate with Bitcoin” text, and test whether it depressed conversion or not. Here is what that looked like: [...]

The test showed that revenue per visitor drops by about $0.07 USD. Here is the Optimizely graph showing a 7.5% reduction in revenue per visitor:[...]
I find it hard to believe that $0.07 is a statistically significant amount. Especially considering that most of the other payment methods involve high fees, so even if overall donations drop, the amount received by modzilla (or wikipedia) could potentially increase

It's all explained, just click the link.

Quote
Seven cents doesn't sound like much. However, at scale, it adds up. Our donation form will get roughly two million more visitors before the campaign concludes on December 31st — which means adding “Donate with Bitcoin” would reduce income by about $140,000 – a significant amount.
At this time, bitcoin donations are not high enough to offset that lost revenue. We want to make sure bitcoin donors can find a link to give bitcoin, but this test suggests our primary donation form isn't the optimum location.

So no, lower fees don't help much in this case.




Title: Re: Wikipedia
Post by: exoton on December 19, 2014, 02:20:56 AM
...
I know that they are accepting it if you do some research BUT why hiding it ??
...

Why? Likely for the same reasons Mozilla removed bitcoin donation button. It distracted page viewers resulting in less donations.

https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/ (https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/)

Quote
We received numerous requests from donors that they wanted bitcoin featured right on our primary donation form. Given the volume of page views to that form (millions during the life of the campaign), I was concerned that adding any unnecessary text would distract donors and depress non-bitcoin conversions, the source of more than 99% of all our campaign revenue. So we decided to add “Donate with Bitcoin” text, and test whether it depressed conversion or not. Here is what that looked like: [...]

The test showed that revenue per visitor drops by about $0.07 USD. Here is the Optimizely graph showing a 7.5% reduction in revenue per visitor:[...]
I find it hard to believe that $0.07 is a statistically significant amount. Especially considering that most of the other payment methods involve high fees, so even if overall donations drop, the amount received by modzilla (or wikipedia) could potentially increase

It's all explained, just click the link.

Quote
Seven cents doesn't sound like much. However, at scale, it adds up. Our donation form will get roughly two million more visitors before the campaign concludes on December 31st — which means adding “Donate with Bitcoin” would reduce income by about $140,000 – a significant amount.
At this time, bitcoin donations are not high enough to offset that lost revenue. We want to make sure bitcoin donors can find a link to give bitcoin, but this test suggests our primary donation form isn't the optimum location.

So no, lower fees don't help much in this case.



Well then my 2nd argument is that they accepting bitcoin may get additional people to donate that would not otherwise have donated (and will not donate without a prominent option to donate via bitcoin). I know this is somewhat of a stretch, however overall traffic should be looked at as well