Asklemmy

45280 readers

1205 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

How do we feel about Meta joining the Fediverse? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 years ago by archchan@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

113 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Personally, I want nothing to do with them and I'm not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I moved to the Fediverse to get away from all these corpos.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] bric@lemm.ee -1 points 2 years ago

I don't understand why everyone freaks out that wikipedia tries to keep a reserve. Yes, they have enough money on hand to run for a few years... Is that really such a bad thing? Why does everyone think nonprofits should be scrimping by before they do their next donation campaign?

To me, keeping a reserve fund just seems like good money management, and I'd rather donate to an organization that manages their money well than one that doesn't. If there were problems with a large chunk of donations not going to wikipedia upkeep it would be different, but as far as I can tell all of the controversy is just over the fact that they have a reserve at all