Hacker News Reader

Under what circumstances would Wikipedia shit down, if it still has money for operational expenses?

The biggest set of responsibilities charites I didn't list is sales (aka donations). But Wikipedia doesn't do more good work (as donors think of it) the more money they get. It doesn't scale up much that way.

View on HN

Mismanagement could help those funds disappear pretty quickly. It's rare that any kind of organization or business needs no governance.

Only "mismanagement" used as a euphemism for self-dealing or embezzlement, which is what I think many people suspect is occurring now on some level. Wikipedia has a small, constrained remit and if no one ever edited it again, it would still be very useful for decades.

Not only that. Name a big business or big NGO that runs well and has zero leadership.

Valve?

Valve may have a flat or open structure but GabeN is their god. Find a better example.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com