Hacker News Reader

Wikimedia is a lot like Mozilla. Neither is really hurting for cash.

The big donors will be much less interested if the organization can't show that lots of people are still invested enough in the project to put a little money into it. The many small donors keep the few big donors around.

It's still important to donate to them so they can stay independent.

Say Wikimedia would become dependent on the donations of a company, that company could technically force them to publish misleading information.

In regards to mozilla they are currently not financially independent.

Most of their money comes from google (in exchange google is the default search engine).

"Dependent" suggests a necessity is being fulfilled, and that's the point of my comment. We're past necessity. Both Mozilla and Wikimedia are already bringing in several times over the amount of cash they need to operate.

AIUI, both organizations have plenty of worthwhile projects which are constrained by available funding. They're not just maintaining a web browser + hosting an encyclopedia.

Of course, this is not to say that funding the Archive isn't also important.

> both organizations have plenty of worthwhile projects

Yes of course.

But both projects' biggest constraints are not (lack of) funding. It's bad mismanagement, or in the case of Mozilla, really bad mismanagement.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com