Here's their budget for 2020

https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Mediu...

They budgeted $5M for "data centre expenses". We cannot know for sure how much it would really cost if WMF only focused on running their website. But $10M doesn't sound implausible to me.

If WMF would only run the website, the content would only be advertisment and propaganda.

Are you sure? There are about 1100 unpaid administrators.

Which is a thankless job.

Sure, but what does that gave to do with anything?

That if you are going to pay a sub set in a mostly volunteer project it [imho] should be the most shitty tasks. Improved moderation would dramatically improve the wiki as people are quick to leave if the mod is unable to do the work required.

How much does WMF spend to prevent the content being "only be advertisment and propaganda"?

But WNF does not emoloy any moderators so I am sure Wikipedia would do fine.

That's what some people want. They're horrified there's a free platform providing useful content, where they can't profit off people's work.

Your comment would make sense if moderating wikipedia cost that extra $102,000,000 we’re talking about. But it doesn’t.

Wikimedia has one project I’m slightly interested in, and spends most of their money on other projects that I’m completely uninterested in, and would personally consider to be largely a useless waste of time. They aggressively fundraise with a message that implies their single product that everybody cares about is financially imperilled. In reality, if they’d been run responsibly, the one valuable thing they produce could have already been financially secured for decades into the future.

I really just don’t care about what they spend most of their money on, I think they’re deceitful in the way that they fundraise, and all I hope is when all of their side projects eventually fail, that their core product survives in some form.

What are the “other projects” you are referring to?

Everything on this list that isn’t Wikipedia, along with essentially all of the research they fund.

https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Complete_list_of_Wikimedia...

You don’t have to put it in air quotes like you’re making some sort of point. Calling everything they fund a “project” is the language Wikimedia use in their budgets and governance documentation.

If you were actually having trouble thinking of a single project they operate other than Wikipedia, then perhaps you might also have some questions about what they do with 90% of their revenue.

You are reading way too far into what I wrote. I was only asking a question. The “air quotes” were quotes. Because I was quoting you, and that’s when you’re supposed to use them. Like above.

Thank you for the link. I was unaware.

Using quotation marks in that fashion is widely understood that is has its own wikipedia page (though they have a different name in print).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes

But don’t worry. I’m sure you really were just “quoting [me]”.