Is Wikipedia Trolling? When is enough, enough?
twitter.com
twitter.com
No. They're asking for money. You should look up the definition of trolling.
They have similarly aggressive ads for people in the US as well.
> When is enough, enough?
When people provide as much value to Wikipedia and Wikipedia provides to them. By that I mean giving Wikipedia enough money that it can run indefinitely.
(I'm actually not that bothered by Wikipedia's nag screens because they are easily discarded and I can identify with the cause.
However, there seems to be a proliferation of agressive, undismissable "quasi-paywall" nag screens in other services that would do really well to die a quick death. But of course they won't...)
Is this sincere? How does it reduce the value? You just scroll past it.
> I think you can call that trolling.
You can call it trolling, but you won't be using the same definition as most people[1].
If Wikipedia is trolling, then so are art galleries who ask you to donate at the door, churches who pass around a collection plate, toll roads, and anyone else who provides a public service and asks for money.
If people are really irritated by Wikipedia asking for money, they should stop using it. But they won't because it's literally one of the most important and useful creations in human history. How can people begrudge them a request for a donation?
1. From Webster's:
> a : to antagonize (others) online by deliberately posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content … trolls engage in the most outrageous and offensive behaviors possible—all the better to troll you with. — Whitney Phillips
> b : to act as a troll (see 3troll 2) on (a forum, site, etc.) … is also notorious, for trolling message boards on the Internet, posting offensive material he himself has written and then suing anyone who responds in agreement. — Mark Hemingway