Jimmy Wales does not sleep. He waits … for your money.
Jimmy Wales’ tears cure lack of funding. Too bad he only cries in November and December.
There is no chin behind Jimmy Wales’ beard. There is only another “donate” button.
Jimmy Wales doesn’t do pushups — he gets your donation.
When the Bogeyman goes to sleep every night, he clutches the printout of his Wikipedia donation receipt as he checks his closet for Jimmy Wales.
Jimmy Wales does not go hunting donations, because the word “hunting” implies the possibility of failure. Jimmy Wales goes collecting donations.
Jimmy Wales sold his soul to the devil for his rugged good looks and unparalleled fundraising ability. When the deal had been done, Jimmy looked the devil lovingly in the eye and got his soul donated back.
Jimmy Wales not only gave Objectivists a nice reputation, he got them to donate to his charity out of enlightened self-interest.
The Wikimedia Foundation can build a funding drive out of paper clips, rubber bands and soda cans. And does so, every year.
If you can see Jimmy Wales, he can see you. If you can’t see Jimmy Wales, you may be only seconds away from donating.
Yeah, but the one about Objectivists is actually sort of true…
So’s the one about paper clips, rubber bands and soda cans.
Well, and don’t forget lots of money to PR firms who then make things that no one is happy with. Although this drive’s banner seems to have much less drama than the last few.
Don’t agree with the ‘Objectivists’ bit. Jimmy Wales is hardly an Objectivist.
Okay, I get your point. But if you look closely at his appeal for donations he makes a reference to “our collective potential”. No Objectivist would speak like that.
Though Jimmy Wales professes himself to a be an Objectivist, I’m acquainted with a few influential O’ists who don’t think he is one and wouldn’t donate to Wikipedia for the reason highlighted above.
Jimmy is so good that they donated anyway, out of enlightened self-interest.
though funny, it is unfair to do this to jimmy wales.
Why do people think Objectivists don’t do things collectively?? They’ll do all SORTS of things collectively as long as they’re not forced to do it. Hey, a party is a collective action … and whomever thinks Objectivists aren’t partiers has never met one!
Doing things collectively and making references to “our collective potential” are two fundamentally different concepts. Building Wikipedia is as much a matter of individual initiative as playing at Wimbledon.
Objectivists collaborate with each other but have their self-interest as the primary motivator for action.
>They’ll do all SORTS of things collectively as long as they’re not forced to do it.
That is a common misunderstanding amongst non-Objectivists. Any action does not become moral if it is voluntary. For instance, altruism can also be voluntary.
I contribute to Wikipedia for a very selfish reason – it helps expand my knowledge. I donate to Wikipedia because it is a very deserving project and the small amount of money that I give doesn’t adversely affect my well-being. The differentiation is in the primary motive.
I think Jimmy is a great guy and that he started something that has changed the world for good. Perhaps, he should choose his words more carefully? :)
Jimmy Wales is probably the second most prominent Objectivist in the world, the first being Alan Greenspan.
“This group was the nucleus of a growing movement of Rand admirers whose name was chosen as a _joke_ based on Objectivism’s staunch commitment to individualism.” (from the link)
Alan Greenspan is a former Objectivist. As the chairman of the US Fed, he deviated from the economic principles he had espoused in his earlier years.
Jimmy Wales is a prominent man by the virtue of being the founder of Wikipedia.
Ayn Rand didn’t choose to expel Greenspan, and no-one else has the power to declare someone else “not an Objectivist”.
This would suggest there are no “prominent” Objectivists – there is pretty much no-one in the world at present famous for being an Objectivist. Thus, Greenspan and Wales remain first and second.
So Mediawiki is the result of Objectivist-oriented programming?
I thought Objectivists were just a nasty fairy tale my mother used to tell us to stop us getting complacent about the welfare state.
I thought the Objectivists were the bad guys in the original Tron.
Brilliant! I lol’d at the bogeyman and devil ones, those are the best imo :D
Jimmy Wales does not sleep. He waits … for your money.
Yeah, but the one about Objectivists is actually sort of true…
So’s the one about paper clips, rubber bands and soda cans.
Well, and don’t forget lots of money to PR firms who then make things that no one is happy with. Although this drive’s banner seems to have much less drama than the last few.
Don’t agree with the ‘Objectivists’ bit. Jimmy Wales is hardly an Objectivist.
No true Objectivist would gain a reputation for niceness!
Okay, I get your point. But if you look closely at his appeal for donations he makes a reference to “our collective potential”. No Objectivist would speak like that.
Though Jimmy Wales professes himself to a be an Objectivist, I’m acquainted with a few influential O’ists who don’t think he is one and wouldn’t donate to Wikipedia for the reason highlighted above.
Jimmy is so good that they donated anyway, out of enlightened self-interest.
though funny, it is unfair to do this to jimmy wales.
Why do people think Objectivists don’t do things collectively?? They’ll do all SORTS of things collectively as long as they’re not forced to do it. Hey, a party is a collective action … and whomever thinks Objectivists aren’t partiers has never met one!
Doing things collectively and making references to “our collective potential” are two fundamentally different concepts. Building Wikipedia is as much a matter of individual initiative as playing at Wimbledon.
Objectivists collaborate with each other but have their self-interest as the primary motivator for action.
>They’ll do all SORTS of things collectively as long as they’re not forced to do it.
That is a common misunderstanding amongst non-Objectivists. Any action does not become moral if it is voluntary. For instance, altruism can also be voluntary.
I contribute to Wikipedia for a very selfish reason – it helps expand my knowledge. I donate to Wikipedia because it is a very deserving project and the small amount of money that I give doesn’t adversely affect my well-being. The differentiation is in the primary motive.
I think Jimmy is a great guy and that he started something that has changed the world for good. Perhaps, he should choose his words more carefully? :)
Yes, no true Objectivist would ever call their group a “collective”.
Jimmy Wales is probably the second most prominent Objectivist in the world, the first being Alan Greenspan.
“This group was the nucleus of a growing movement of Rand admirers whose name was chosen as a _joke_ based on Objectivism’s staunch commitment to individualism.” (from the link)
Alan Greenspan is a former Objectivist. As the chairman of the US Fed, he deviated from the economic principles he had espoused in his earlier years.
Jimmy Wales is a prominent man by the virtue of being the founder of Wikipedia.
Ayn Rand didn’t choose to expel Greenspan, and no-one else has the power to declare someone else “not an Objectivist”.
This would suggest there are no “prominent” Objectivists – there is pretty much no-one in the world at present famous for being an Objectivist. Thus, Greenspan and Wales remain first and second.
So Mediawiki is the result of Objectivist-oriented programming?
I thought Objectivists were just a nasty fairy tale my mother used to tell us to stop us getting complacent about the welfare state.
I thought the Objectivists were the bad guys in the original Tron.
Brilliant! I lol’d at the bogeyman and devil ones, those are the best imo :D
@Peter da Silva: badum-tish! :)
Gya ha ha ha ha, the devil part, gya ha ha ha…
Epic! :-)
Glad you love it, Jimmy!