no, like pushing political agendas
xitter.twitterapi.xyz/i/status/1872087182967…
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
9
335
22,539
the "DEI" being expanding wikipedia into more lamguages and increasing the size of non-english wikipedia - a literal core function of the project
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
1
6
137
Wekopedia 😏
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
And they wonder why I never donated
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
2
47
😂 I was never tempted to give these partisan political hacks money, and the following underscores the correctness of my instincts...
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
Wokepedia 😂
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
3
607
"Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site."
Please stop donating!
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
No thanks! DEI is being rejected literally everywhere. You stick with it and you will be rejected as well.
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
1
99
The solution is already live⬇️
Own your content & get paid for it.
All information has competitors in real life-- why is it not present in our reference materials?
Follow @SLictionary & early-adopt the future, NOW.
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
This being the reason...
xitter.twitterapi.xyz/MarioNawfal/status/187…
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
4
8
3,386
Fui ver, era wokismo.
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
1
155
Let´s defund wikipedia to the end!
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
Why you should never donate to @Wikipedia
Nor should you ever trust it as a source
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
Never used it.
Never trusted it.
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
I wanna remind everybody there is already an anti-woke alternative to Wikipedia, and its only lasting legacy is an endless treasure trove of stuff to laugh at.
It thinks the Titanic sank due to too many safety measures.
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
4
3
152
É a wokepedia não tem jeito hahahahaha
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
1
3
66
What the fuck are you complaining about
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
3
12
754
ウィキペディア、wokeのために5000万ドルを費やす
昨年のウィキペディアの予算の約30%が、多様性、公平性、包摂性に充てられたことが判明。
つまり、実際のサイトの改善ではなく、5000万ドルがDEI
に充てられたということだ。➡️
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
Wokipedia misuses donations.
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
3
38
bout to donate money to @Wikipedia
WIKIPEDIA BLOWS $50M ON WOKENESS
Turns out nearly 30% of Wikipedia’s budget last year went to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
That’s $50 million for DEI instead of, you know, improving the actual site.
Critics are calling it “Wokepedia,” accusing the platform of prioritizing ideology over function.
Meanwhile, the internet’s collective eye-roll is almost audible.
Sure, inclusion is nice, but maybe they could use some of that money to ensure they're a reliable source of information first? Just a thought.
Source: medium
3
130