The issue is not whether Wikipedia is important or not. It is indeed very important, despite it's many faults, and that's exactly why many donate even if they struggle financially.

The issue is that in the world we live in every organization has as its primary goal to stay alive and grow - the primary goal of the WMF is to get more money, to pay themselves better. The knowledge curated by volunteers became merely a product they can use to profit from.

Not even 5% of their annual expenses are for hosting. It would be entirely possible for them to cap their donations to 50 million, and wikipedia itself would still be the same. But hundreds of people would stop receiving money for what is likely a privileged and secure job that doesn't require lots of effort. A secure bubble to live in and feel good about. Sadly, this is technically parasitic - others are doing the work, and these people leach on both the work of volunteers, and money of donors.

The sad truth is that emotionally manipulative messages are essential to the survival and growth of the WMF. It's simply a complacent strategy to get the biggest financial return with the least amount of work. If they published a message that said "This year we need 10 million to survive, everything extra is optional and you don't need to donate if you don't have spare money. No matter what happens, Wikipedia will stay online, because we will always manage to collect enough money to cover the hosting", then many privileged people at the WMF would lose their secure job.

And that's why the WMF will NEVER change the strategy, even though they pay lip-service to keep the volunteers in line.

If one day they get 500 million per year in donations, their expenses will rise accordingly, to something like 400 million, as putting away 100 million is in their best own interest. What's not in their own interest, though, is respecting the wishes of the volunteers and donors.

When we look at it from the outside, we can understand the donation campaigns as the work of a self-serving entity that takes the free knowledge of the world hostage for their own advantage.

Now, no one can blame them - in the system we live in, this is the only way how organizations can exist. They always try to survive and grow and sustain itself.

The bigger problem is that society hasn't yet figured out how to create structures that don't devolve into money-grabs, but continue to serve the public good.

The problem is with the incentives and lack of transparency. A traditional corporation has an incentive to be economical - at least small and middle sized companies do. If you have 10 employees, and one of them has 0% productivity, you have to fire him.

WMF has what to them likely feels like an endless money flow based on nothing but a banner. They can use as much money as they receive, and there won't be any negative consequences at all in the short-term.

What the WMF calls "expenses" is actually simply the decision to transfer most of the income immediately into the hands of the employees of the WMF.

In a world of ads, affiliate links and profit-driven journalism, Wikipedia, despite its faults, is essential, even in the state it's currently in. It should be scrutinized, but be kept in mind that it's still one of the best things that exist on the world wide web.