In a response you said: "I would understand your claim if you wrote that you unsubscribed from recurring donations. But why should I—or anyone else—be interested in your use of a free utility?" Maybe you shouldn't be interested, except that my concerns seem to be shared by lots of other people — and by Wikipedia, which says you are no longer trustworthy. Maybe you don't care about that either, but if you don't care what users or Wikipedia or any of its users think then why did you bother setting up archive.today in the first place?

Wikipedia is more than just a lesbian SJW politbüro trying to hide behind a hypernym. Wikignomes (actual content writers) love us for neat features like accordion unfolding or joining multi-page content into a single page, while WMF tries to distance itself from copyright issues and always remained silent. All of this has low priority for many reasons; for example, it seems that this is the only site that actively uses the archive whose bosses have never reached out to us to ask anything or negotiate anything (the only contact is GreenC who is not even allowed to run their WaybackMedic on WMF servers). So it’s mutual.

Why bother setting up: to watch over some pages changing over time. The mistake was to release a free service to the public, it must be paid (or by-invite) from the beginning. There are way too many free users.