Internet Archive (Home of the Wayback Machine) Accepting Bitcoin Donations!

[Technomage]

And how much were you pledging exactly?

How is that relevant exactly? I don't care if the amount is too insignificant for my opinion to matter. But I think that placing the Bitcoin donation link to an almost invisible location is an outrage, honestly. No one is going to notice, no one is going to care.

[1715201084]

1715201084

[SgtSpike]

I wonder if it (or google cache) has a copy of:

https://www.dwolla.com/dialogs/terms_and_conditions.aspx

BEFORE July 27th when they changed it.

Do any forum members have a copy of the Dwolla TOS before July 27th?

Cheers!

They don't seem to.... in fact, they don't have a record of that page at all!  Maybe they don't archive pages that must be accessed via a secured connection?

http://liveweb.archive.org/https://www.dwolla.com/dialogs/terms_and_conditions.aspx

[CoinLab]

And how much were you pledging exactly?

How is that relevant exactly? I don't care if the amount is too insignificant for my opinion to matter. But I think that placing the Bitcoin donation link to an almost invisible location is an outrage, honestly. No one is going to notice, no one is going to care.

The Internet Archive is an established organization with good reputation.  In one day, they set up a Bitcoin account and emailed back their address.  Within two days, they had their address on their FAQ.  If you want to email them to help them improve placement to maximize the number of Bitcoin donations they receive, I fully support you. 

They were prompt and responsive to my email.  They are new at this.  Bitcoin is confusing.  Cut them some slack. 

The link to the BTC address is not in a prominent location, probably because they aren't sure how much money they will be able to raise with it.  BTC addresses are ugly, and a novel concept to understand.

I think your being "genuinely pissed" is childish and laughable. If you want them to move the link, you shouldn't cancel your pledge, you should pledge more! (and email them polite suggestions)  They will want to feature their BTC address prominently if they are earning a comparable amount from BTC as from justgive.org and PayPal.  If they only get pocket change, they will think of it as a hassle and a waste of time. 

Please, do not lash out at charitable organizations.  We want Bitcoin to have a positive reputation.

[N.Olmos]

This is the latest snapshot for terms-of-use that I could find:

OCTOBER 23, 2010
1 snapshot
20:50:53
http://web.archive.org/web/20101023205053/http://www.dwolla.org/help/terms-of-use/

This is the latest snapshot for dwolla.com that is available. Fees/General Information/Terms of Use leads back the the June 25th, 2010 document.

JULY 20, 2011
2 snapshots
13:05:51
13:06:41
http://web.archive.org/web/20110720130641/https://www.dwolla.com/default.aspx


n.olmos

[notme]

And how much were you pledging exactly?

How is that relevant exactly? I don't care if the amount is too insignificant for my opinion to matter. But I think that placing the Bitcoin donation link to an almost invisible location is an outrage, honestly. No one is going to notice, no one is going to care.

The Internet Archive is an established organization with good reputation.  In one day, they set up a Bitcoin account and emailed back their address.  Within two days, they had their address on their FAQ.  If you want to email them to help them improve placement to maximize the number of Bitcoin donations they receive, I fully support you. 

They were prompt and responsive to my email.  They are new at this.  Bitcoin is confusing.  Cut them some slack. 

The link to the BTC address is not in a prominent location, probably because they aren't sure how much money they will be able to raise with it.  BTC addresses are ugly, and a novel concept to understand.

I think your being "genuinely pissed" is childish and laughable. If you want them to move the link, you shouldn't cancel your pledge, you should pledge more! (and email them polite suggestions)  They will want to feature their BTC address prominently if they are earning a comparable amount from BTC as from justgive.org and PayPal.  If they only get pocket change, they will think of it as a hassle and a waste of time. 

Please, do not lash out at charitable organizations.  We want Bitcoin to have a positive reputation.

+1

[SgtSpike]

And how much were you pledging exactly?

How is that relevant exactly? I don't care if the amount is too insignificant for my opinion to matter. But I think that placing the Bitcoin donation link to an almost invisible location is an outrage, honestly. No one is going to notice, no one is going to care.

The Internet Archive is an established organization with good reputation.  In one day, they set up a Bitcoin account and emailed back their address.  Within two days, they had their address on their FAQ.  If you want to email them to help them improve placement to maximize the number of Bitcoin donations they receive, I fully support you. 

They were prompt and responsive to my email.  They are new at this.  Bitcoin is confusing.  Cut them some slack. 

The link to the BTC address is not in a prominent location, probably because they aren't sure how much money they will be able to raise with it.  BTC addresses are ugly, and a novel concept to understand.

I think your being "genuinely pissed" is childish and laughable. If you want them to move the link, you shouldn't cancel your pledge, you should pledge more! (and email them polite suggestions)  They will want to feature their BTC address prominently if they are earning a comparable amount from BTC as from justgive.org and PayPal.  If they only get pocket change, they will think of it as a hassle and a waste of time. 

Please, do not lash out at charitable organizations.  We want Bitcoin to have a positive reputation.

I think childish and laughable aptly describes the response from Technomage.  Well put.

[teukon]

Truly awesome!  archive.org is something I've used a lot and actually tried to donate to on several occasions but I always ran into difficulties and gave.  Now I can finally donate to this worthy cause with ease!

25 BTC sent.

[BkkCoins]

Sent a little bit since I think what they do is cool, but I don't use it much.

[BeeCee1]

I have to say that I'll break my pledge at this time meaning that I am not donating a satoshi until my concerns are noted. I'm extremely unhappy with the positioning of that Bitcoin donation link, it's not up there with the other donation methods. I would have NEVER found it if I wasn't explicitly looking for it. I'm sorry to be this negative but I'm genuinely pissed about this.

The purpose of the Internet Archive isn't to publicize bitcoin, it is "universal access to all knowledge".  Their accepting bitcoin is great, breaking your pledge because they don't position it as prominently as paypal seems rather petty.

[Serge]

 i'm glad that they confirmed their "bitcoin site" on their archive site; that's all that mattered really.

[Littleshop]

Glad they confirmed it.  I wish it was a more obvious space on the page but it is what it is.  I just donated, I have found archive.org to be useful a number of times!

[nmat]

Apparently they are registered with the IRS Publication 78 (whatever that is), so bit-pay could process their payments for free. Everytime I donate bitcoins I am afraid that the owner will only cash them a month from now and that he will only get half of what I donated...

[beckspace]

Great service, definitely worth it!

I like the "Every bit helps" as donation motto.

[finway]

This is a huge site.

[Technomage]

I'm not lashing out at them, I'm simply stating my opinion on this forum. I have absolute zero interest in donating to this particular organization for other reasons than the publicity Bitcoin gets from this. When you take that reason away, my donation goes away. Period. It's just that simple. I don't see how this is childish.

If the person who made this happen in the first place can't ask them about the crappy positioning, I will ask them myself. But I was thinking that it would make sense if the same person did it who has been in contact with them before.

And one more note, I'm going to donate more than I originally intentioned if they actually change the position of the donation link. That would really show that they are interested in Bitcoin.

[Revalin]

I try to be grateful for what I am given.  Being "genuinely pissed" because it's not your perfect lollipop just comes off as spoiled.

I think the page could be arranged better, but as it stands it's already a great benefit for everyone.

[CoinLab]

If the person who made this happen in the first place can't ask them about the crappy positioning, I will ask them myself. But I was thinking that it would make sense if the same person did it who has been in contact with them before.

And one more note, I'm going to donate more than I originally intentioned if they actually change the position of the donation link. That would really show that they are interested in Bitcoin.

You are right.

In my last email reply, after thanking them for posting the address, I asked for the BTC address to be posted directly on the donate page, with a label.  

However, if more people email them with their comments on the placement, as well as their enthusiasm to donate, they might be motivated to improve the placement sooner.

Let's keep the conversation positive. 

I like the "Every bit helps" as donation motto.

This is great.

[payb.tc]

smallest donation value so far: $0.16

it's so awesome that donating such an amount over the net is possible.

i wonder how much the banks would charge to do that.

anyway sent mine... they're up to 183 btc now.

[teukon]

I'm in agreement with Technomage on this one.

1) If you wanted to donate to archive.org anyway but would prefer bitcoins and are holding funds back because of crappy positioning you are being petty.

2) If you are donating to charities and organisations which take the time and effort to add a Bitcoin donation option simply because you want to promote Bitcoin then I feel withholding funds is justified.

Rather than arguing it would be good to try and work out how much archive.org would receive for repositioning it's Bitcoin donation option appropriately?  Also, are there people who are worried that archive.org may have rushed into this without thinking properly and shortly have to remove their donation link for legal reasons and consequently are holding back their donation for a month or so?

[teukon]

smallest donation value so far: $0.16

it's so awesome that donating such an amount over the net is possible.

i wonder how much the banks would charge to do that.

anyway sent mine... they're up to 183 btc now.

Yes, this is going very well.  I don't know much about fees but which payment processors charge a fee for donating money and how much?  Is anyone able to make a reasonable estimate to the amout of purchasing power which has been saved by using Bitcoin rather than, say, PayPal?  How about currency conversion? (I'm not from the US at least).