However, seeing Wiki as a pretty "hungry" organization - they do put big banners begging for money now and then - I think that's a losing move on their side. Although they've received "only" 130k worth of crypto as donations, it's much better than nothing.
Wikipedia often puts up banners that I think amount to begging. As such, I think it would make sense to have as broad of payment options as possible. The rationale behind the decision really does not matter IMO -- they are making it incrementally more difficult for people to donate, which is a negative for Wikipedia.
" technology that are inherently predatory,”
What a bunch of nonsense. I suspect the real reason is more likely: they have a far-left bias on many articles and fascists/totalitarians etc can't survive when people are free for long. When there is free discourse and a monetary instrument that can't be as easily censored as bank accounts (see e.g. Canada) they, and their masters, lose. A technology that allows people to is decentralized and censorship resistant is unacceptable.
Unfortunatley, the far-left has a strong hold on many institutions.