Getting Wikipedia to accept Bitcoin donations - Community pledge

[Gaff]

I am generally very supportive of this.

1. The amount that would be donated via Bitcoin is too small to be worth the trouble.

This objection is the easiest to refute; all we need is to demonstrate the quantitative aspects of our willingness to donate, and this is what this post is mostly about.

Can you ask them to qualify how much exactly makes it "worth the trouble"? Once you have a specific target amount, and escrow, I will willingly donate $50 to this cause.

[1713968035]

1713968035

[1713968035]

1713968035

[1713968035]

1713968035

[Meni Rosenfeld]

Stupid idea, waste of money.

People who spend their time to post wiki pages, make edits etc never get any money.

Wikimedia is already earning good enough money via donations for their operating cost.

The Wikimedia foundation is a nonprofit, they're not "earning" money.

Whether they're putting the donated money to good use can be assessed from their financial reports.

I am generally very supportive of this.

1. The amount that would be donated via Bitcoin is too small to be worth the trouble.

This objection is the easiest to refute; all we need is to demonstrate the quantitative aspects of our willingness to donate, and this is what this post is mostly about.

Can you ask them to qualify how much exactly makes it "worth the trouble"? Once you have a specific target amount, and escrow, I will willingly donate $50 to this cause.

I asked Jimmy in an informal context and he directed me to the fundraising team which makes the official decisions. I want to have something behind us before I make the first formal inquiry.

I don't think they should be bothered before we have at least $10K worth (100 BTC at current rates), preferably much more. Do you need them to quote a number? If so, why?

In the arrangement I suggested every treasurer acts as an "escrow". No qualifications are required other than being trustworthy. Do you mean there are some specific people you wish will be treasurers?

[WiW]

Can you ask them to qualify how much exactly makes it "worth the trouble"? Once you have a specific target amount, and escrow, I will willingly donate $50 to this cause.

I think we're gonna have to start raising a significant amount before they actually consider this thread something worth looking into. If you come up to them saying "how much would you want" you're less likely to get a response than "we raised $50000, how much more do you want?".

But whoever you pick to hold the funds as escrow should promise you that the money will not be used for anything other than reaching wikimedia, whenever that may be. So go for it.

[DiamondCardz]

Eh, you don't need to trust one person with all the BTC in escrow, you can spread it across multiple treasurers. I would do that, but you probably don't count me as trustworthy

[Gaff]

If you come up to them saying "how much would you want" you're less likely to get a response than "we raised $50000, how much more do you want?".

Perhaps, but I still don't think this justifies less stringent management. Besides, you can always open with "I know we can easily get $50000, how much more do you want?"

Do you need them to quote a number? If so, why?

I believe that projects like this need measurable attainable goals. Currently it's (appologies for paraphrasing) "If we raise lots of money I'm sure wikipedia will accept bitcoins". I'd like it to be "If we raise $100000 wikipedia will agree to accept bitcoin donations for at least 2 years". The key difference is that with the first there's a very real danger that I'm essentially throwing my money into a black hole, which is no good for anyone. The second one alows anyone to judge if the project was run fairly and achieved its goals.

Essentially I'd like to "kickstarterify" the project.

[WiW]

Perhaps, but I still don't think this justifies less stringent management. Besides, you can always open with "I know we can easily get $50000, how much more do you want?"

You are welcome to offer whoever you want to act as escrow. The point being that there are addresses dedicated to wikimedia donations. And having the funds there and ready for wikimedia to just say "yes".

I believe that projects like this need measurable attainable goals. Currently it's (appologies for paraphrasing) "If we raise lots of money I'm sure wikipedia will accept bitcoins". I'd like it to be "If we raise $100000 wikipedia will agree to accept bitcoin donations for at least 2 years". The key difference is that with the first there's a very real danger that I'm essentially throwing my money into a black hole, which is no good for anyone. The second one alows anyone to judge if the project was run fairly and achieved its goals.

Essentially I'd like to "kickstarterify" the project.

That's great, it would be nice to have a figure, but it doesn't seem that wikimedia is even considering this. So until then, we should raise what we can to prove our intentions.

[Meni Rosenfeld]

If you come up to them saying "how much would you want" you're less likely to get a response than "we raised $50000, how much more do you want?".

Perhaps, but I still don't think this justifies less stringent management. Besides, you can always open with "I know we can easily get $50000, how much more do you want?"

That would be a lie, I don't know it without more supporting evidence. And even if we can and we know it, they have no reason to believe our optimism.

I believe that projects like this need measurable attainable goals. Currently it's (appologies for paraphrasing) "If we raise lots of money I'm sure wikipedia will accept bitcoins". I'd like it to be "If we raise $100000 wikipedia will agree to accept bitcoin donations for at least 2 years". The key difference is that with the first there's a very real danger that I'm essentially throwing my money into a black hole, which is no good for anyone. The second one alows anyone to judge if the project was run fairly and achieved its goals.

Essentially I'd like to "kickstarterify" the project.

Your money is thrown into a black hole only in one of the following scenarios:

1. Wikimedia will never accept Bitcoin donations.
2. Wikimedia's decision to accept Bitcoin donations will not be influenced by the amount raised, and you have no interest at all in donating to Wikipedia, just in getting them to accept Bitcoin.

I personally don't think either is likely.


It's very simple to demonstrate the project was run fairly; the requirements are:
1. No funds are spent for a purpose other than those stated
2. When Wikimedia accepts Bitcoin donations, the funds are donated to them.


Will it help if we rephrase it as two separate goals?
1. Get enough funds to credibly approach Wikimedia (tentative target: 200 BTC)
2. Get enough funds to convince Wikimedia (target: Unknown)

You may not yet have enough information to optimally contribute to the 2nd goal, but you can contribute to the 1st, also important, goal.

[Gaff]

It's very simple to demonstrate the project was run fairly; the requirements are:
1. No funds are spent for a purpose other than those stated
2. When Wikimedia accepts Bitcoin donations, the funds are donated to them.

I agree it's easy to judge if it succeeds. But what if they never want our coins? Or if wikimedia only accept a one-off donation? Was it not enough funds? Unasailable technical hurdles? Bad will from wikimedia? Laziness on your part? etc... I just want to close off some of those doors.

Just to be clear - I don't doubt your dedication or integrity for a moment. However this is the internet and so extreme caution is always best.

Will it help if we rephrase it as two separate goals?
1. Get enough funds to credibly approach Wikimedia (tentative target: 200 BTC)
2. Get enough funds to convince Wikimedia (target: Unknown)

You may not yet have enough information to optimally contribute to the 2nd goal, but you can contribute to the 1st, also important, goal.

Sure - if you get some acknowledgement from wikimedia that they will agree to serious / technical talks if we can pledge 200BTC that's fine. If it's just a vague "I think this is enough" then I'll remain sceptical.

One final point. Charity donation is more maleable that you are giving it credit for. Of course money talks, but it doesn't have to literally be cash undeneath someone's nose to have value. Being a respected representative of a wealthy community *is* tangible value to charaties - and they know this! Don't be afraid to talk yourself up!

[Meni Rosenfeld]

Laziness on your part? etc...

Just to be clear - I don't doubt your dedication or integrity for a moment. However this is the internet and so extreme caution is always best.

I'll emphasize that this project isn't about just me. I believe I'm qualified to make the contact and am happy to do so, but if I don't push this forward anyone else is free to pick up the slack. The rules for the pledge are fairly clear; and as a treasurer myself I am committed to properly use the funds I hold, however this proceeds. If we all forget about this thing and at some future time someone will want to take another shot, the funds will still be waiting.

Will it help if we rephrase it as two separate goals?
1. Get enough funds to credibly approach Wikimedia (tentative target: 200 BTC)
2. Get enough funds to convince Wikimedia (target: Unknown)

You may not yet have enough information to optimally contribute to the 2nd goal, but you can contribute to the 1st, also important, goal.

Sure - if you get some acknowledgement from wikimedia that they will agree to serious / technical talks if we can pledge 200BTC that's fine. If it's just a vague "I think this is enough" then I'll remain sceptical.

It's turtles all the way down. Quoting a number that will persuade them to have a serious talk is itself serious talk. We need to bootstrap this somehow. And whatever we do, some uncertainties are bound to remain.

One final point. Charity donation is more maleable that you are giving it credit for. Of course money talks, but it doesn't have to literally be cash undeneath someone's nose to have value. Being a respected representative of a wealthy community *is* tangible value to charaties - and they know this! Don't be afraid to talk yourself up!

I'll keep that in mind.

Wikimedia isn't getting jack from me until they accept Bitcoin.

Yes, that's the point. Collected funds will not be given to them unless they accept Bitcoin or need the funds to work towards it.

[edd]

I love this idea(s), a large sum of bitcoins would definitely help getting past the biggest objection of the amount of money donated in bitcoins is small. (which admittedly is a problem until bitcoin gets bigger.)

The only problem is the current address, I'd prefer that there be some trusted escrow address or something along those lines.

I believe Meni to be at least as trustworthy as any other bitcointalk member.

• He's been here since March of 2011.
• He's operated Bitcoil since 2011.
• I can personally verify that he was physically present at the San Jose conference.
• More info about him, positive and otherwise, can be found here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=121314.0

I seriously doubt that even his detractors believe he would run off with bitcoins meant for Wikimedia.

[solex]

I seriously doubt that even his detractors believe he would run off with bitcoins meant for Wikimedia.

Fully agree. Congratulations to Meni on getting this new initiative off and running.
Wikipedia is number 6 in the top websites by traffic and it would be a major milestone for bitcoin to be seen there (apart from as an encyclopedia entry!)

[doof]

Now khan academy are, maybe they will consider?

[Transisto]

Wikipedia to accept bitcoin donation would have given a push to bitcoin's legitimacy ... in 2012 !!!

Since then, bitcoin has been talked about in almost every news and TV show on this planet.

Have you considered donating to initiatives that helping grow the Bitcoin ecosystem instead ?

[Mark_Twain]

Great iniciative, just gave my 0.5 tip to 19HHHDya8PNqdVpiCdZYuwKyuWFoU1TC9A i hope it works.

[Meni Rosenfeld]

Wikipedia to accept bitcoin donation would have given a push to bitcoin's legitimacy ... in 2012 !!!

Since then, bitcoin has been talked about in almost every news and TV show on this planet.

It's been talked about all right, but what is being said? Usually it's ranging from neutral to negative.

Few people can value Bitcoin on its own merit; most need the approval of others. Having a site of Wikipedia's caliber accept Bitcoin would greatly improve the perception.

Have you considered donating to initiatives that helping grow the Bitcoin ecosystem instead ?

Why does it need to be instead? There are many initiatives that help grow the Bitcoin ecosystem, this is one of them.

Where's our cool wiki bitcoin fundraising website... page... hell a widget even...

But really, fundraising of such high value needs a little more than just a forum post for adaptive adoption.

Are you volunteering?

I sure hope all those coins make it to wiki, even if it takes a few more years to get to 1000BTC. Until then, enjoy the free coins.

I can't use the coins for any purpose, I have to secure them and I have to pay out of pocket if anything happens to them. What is there to enjoy?

[super3]

We would need a large community effort to get this done. Just $10,000 is not going to cut it. Wikipedia acceptance of Bitcoin would lead to a nice little price spike, so we could consider it an investment perhaps.

[super3]

Are you volunteering?

Yea right! I'll volunteer my way down to electric avenue. The max I can do right now is offer shitty marketing advice.

I wish I could get away with attempting to raise 1000BTC / $100,000 with a single forum thread.

Just saying, without enough of a presence this attempt will fade into obscurity and free coins for OP!

Agreed. This needs to go to a reputable escrow.

[row5_seat47]

Wikimedia Chair

On December 15th, 2006, I became part of the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation as an appointed member. .... Issues I have been involved with more than the normal amount are:
Fundraising


"If you feel that there are important things to be achieved in the coming year which I should support you are invited to post these on my Talk page."

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jan-Bart


http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees

[Meni Rosenfeld]

I don't think they should be bothered before we have at least $10K worth (100 BTC at current rates), preferably much more. Do you need them to quote a number? If so, why?

You don't think they will be 'bothered' before we can offer at least $10,000, so your plan is raise that as a minimum to make it worth their time, then use it as a bargaining chip to 'tempt' wmf into accepting bitcoin?

If I'm not wrong, they've already stated spelt out their stance clearly- they do not accept fake currency

The Wikimedia Foundation, as a donor-driven organization, has a fiduciary duty to be responsible and prudent with its money. This has been interpreted to mean that we do not accept "artificial" currencies

This response was written more than 2 years ago. They've since repeated it on occasion due to momentum, but it's not set in stone and renewed negotiations can shed light on the real reservations. As I clarified in the OP, recent informal discussions on the issue didn't bring up any qualms about "artificial currencies", just some practical issues.

Is the plan to give them enough fake money for them to consider it "real" enough to take off your hands?

The plan is to have the bitcoins converted to USD before being delivered (via some payment processor). But yes, the plan is to have enough money pledged to make it worth their while.

will it be done under the table  with a kthx, or will they change their tune and publicly acknowledge it?

They will need to officially acknowledge that they're accepting donations via Bitcoin. However, it does not need to be prominently displayed.

There's charitable organisations making visible differences who will gladly accept your money in BTC right now, they don't need to write generic legalese, I guess they are working under the notion that every little helps.. Are they not deserving enough for the $10k instead of giving to detractors, is the publicity more important?

The publicity is important. Whether it's "more" important than the donation itself is for anyone to judge for himself. You can donate to this drive in addition to other causes.

We would need a large community effort to get this done. Just $10,000 is not going to cut it. Wikipedia acceptance of Bitcoin would lead to a nice little price spike, so we could consider it an investment perhaps.

I agree.

Agreed. This needs to go to a reputable escrow.

I don't want this to turn into a discussion about my reputability; it's off-topic and I have a vanity thread for that, which you're free to comment on.

I'll just say that in 2.5 years of working on Bitcoin (2 of which full-time), with both voluntary contributions and various business ventures, I have not once lied or reneged on any commitment (including some upwards of $20K). This has to count for something.

Being called an "escrow" doesn't make one magically more trustworthy. It all boils down to what one has to gain by defecting, and what he has to lose. In fact, being an active escrow already sitting on some customer funds just adds to the "has to gain" side of the equation.

But yes, I do wish more treasurers to be on board.

Yea right! I'll volunteer my way down to electric avenue. The max I can do right now is offer shitty marketing advice.

Advice needs to be more concrete to be useful.

There's definitely more work that can be done for promoting this drive, I'll do what I can but I do need help.

I wish I could get away with attempting to raise 1000BTC / $100,000 with a single forum thread.

It wouldn't be the first time. Though admittedly these amounts are usually raised only with some promise of profit.

Just saying, without enough of a presence this attempt will fade into obscurity

Even if "this" attempt fizzles, any collected funds will still be available for any future attempt, or for when Wikimedia accepts bitcoins without any attempt.

If you believe in donating bitcoins to Wikipedia and/or getting Wikipedia to accept Bitcoin donations, there's very little risk in donating, even if you're bearish about this particular attempt.

And again, "if". I'll personally try to make this a success, and I welcome genuine help.

and free coins for OP!

This again. I already said I will not use the collected coins for personal purposes (and neither should any other treasurer). You can either believe that or not.

[WiW]

Y'all seriously need to read the full OP before posting. Like, seriously.

Finding more treasurers would probably calm most of these nay-sayers. A whole bunch of reputable folks collecting, where each can be picked to act as "escrow", should calm people from thinking free coins are being collected or that they'll be free when wikimedia says "no" before eventually (someday) saying "yes".

We're up to 7.5 BTC, which is $780 at current rates.