2009/1/7 Anders Wegge Keller <[email protected]>: > geni <[email protected]> writes: > >> 2009/1/7 Anders Wegge Keller <[email protected]>: >>> Whiners has always been quicker to the keyboard, then those without >>> opinions either way. That's a human trait, i suppose. Failing to take >>> this fact into the equation effectively invalidates your >>> assesment. And since you haven't mentioned it by now, I will not >>> accept any delayed claims to the opposite. > >> This only works if you are seriously trying to suggest that there >> are people who feel that large banners add to the wikipedia >> experience. > > I think that the large majority who doesn't feel the need to whine > about them accepts them as a nescesary thing to fund WM. > >> Most people come to wikipedia to read articles. Generally having >> font-size: 33 banners between the top of the page and the article is >> not a good way to facilitate this. > > Having no banners and no servers to serve the artuicles are even > worse. Having payed the dangeld to get rid of them, I think most are > happy being acknowledged for the fact.
You miss the point. The banners are not fundraising any more (unless you collapse them) > I don't agree on that point. Having extorted 6+ million $ out of the > readers with a Jesus headline, and then switching the thank you note > to leagal flyspeck, would send the wrong signal. If we NEED Joe Bloggs > meney, we'd better THANK him in the same way. Otherwise he may > OVERLOOK the plea next time it comes around. Any evidence for those claims? And how about thanking him by not degrading his wikipedia experience? -- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
