[Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
33 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

wctaiwan-2
http://i.imgur.com/SbfrTxi.png

I know I'm just pissing in the wind, but this is not OK.

(That's a maximized browser on an 1366x768 display.)

wctaiwan


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Erik Zachte-3
The ad would be slightly more palatable if it used coffee-darkbrown instead of epitaph-black for the plea you can't ignore.

Erik Zachte

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of wctaiwan
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 0:44
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

http://i.imgur.com/SbfrTxi.png

I know I'm just pissing in the wind, but this is not OK.

(That's a maximized browser on an 1366x768 display.)

wctaiwan


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Bohdan Melnychuk
Yeah ad is the word. We claim Wikipedia being ad-less but actually we
are showing people stuff which only in deep sense is different from ads
but looks exactly the same. Or, actually, in this case it looks worse. I
really have a difficulty recalling a site which shows me so little
content initially because the rest is covered in ads. This all went too
far and I hope that Fundraising guys think of less haunting way of
calling for donation.

--Base

On 02.12.2015 3:48, Erik Zachte wrote:

> The ad would be slightly more palatable if it used coffee-darkbrown instead of epitaph-black for the plea you can't ignore.
>
> Erik Zachte
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of wctaiwan
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 0:44
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)
>
> http://i.imgur.com/SbfrTxi.png
>
> I know I'm just pissing in the wind, but this is not OK.
>
> (That's a maximized browser on an 1366x768 display.)
>
> wctaiwan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Nathan Awrich
The reply every year is that the banners are keyed for maximum
effectiveness, even if they are intrusive, in order to make the overall
fundraising drive as short as possible. Fundraising has made small tweaks
to various banners, but generally have not been willing to significantly
reduce the effectiveness of the ads in order to appease Wikimedians... who
are - lets be honest - not a large portion of the target population.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by Bohdan Melnychuk
Money is clearly more important than the people who do the work,

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bohdan Melnychuk
Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 4:01 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Yeah ad is the word. We claim Wikipedia being ad-less but actually we are showing people stuff which only in deep sense is different from ads but looks exactly the same. Or, actually, in this case it looks worse. I really have a difficulty recalling a site which shows me so little content initially because the rest is covered in ads. This all went too far and I hope that Fundraising guys think of less haunting way of calling for donation.

--Base

On 02.12.2015 3:48, Erik Zachte wrote:

> The ad would be slightly more palatable if it used coffee-darkbrown instead of epitaph-black for the plea you can't ignore.
>
> Erik Zachte
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of wctaiwan
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 0:44
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)
>
> http://i.imgur.com/SbfrTxi.png
>
> I know I'm just pissing in the wind, but this is not OK.
>
> (That's a maximized browser on an 1366x768 display.)
>
> wctaiwan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7163 / Virus Database: 4477/11098 - Release Date: 12/01/15


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Bohdan Melnychuk
Bohdan Melnychuk wrote:
>Yeah ad is the word. We claim Wikipedia being ad-less but actually we
>are showing people stuff which only in deep sense is different from ads
>but looks exactly the same. Or, actually, in this case it looks worse. I
>really have a difficulty recalling a site which shows me so little
>content initially because the rest is covered in ads. This all went too
>far and I hope that Fundraising guys think of less haunting way of
>calling for donation.

Yes, it's definitely an advertisement. Adblock and others should treat it
as such. I don't think this ad is haunting, though. I'm a little sad that
when I clicked the Imgur link, I actually expected worse.

Sadly, other sites can be more obnoxious. Some sites have interstitial
advertisements that include auto-playing video. The Wikimedia Foundation
has not yet sunk to that yet.

Samuel Klein wrote:

>I think a more pressing response to this is to reduce the budget to get
>some breathing room, increase work through partnerships (which Wikimedia
>doesn't have to fund entirely on its own), and increase non-banner revenue
>streams.
>
>It's also key to improve banner effectiveness.  How nice it would be to
>have a composite that combines measures of the favorability of the banner
>among readers (most of whom don't donate anyway), mood setting & meme
>propagation, and the reduction in usability of the site (which may have an
>effect over months), against the immediate fundraising impact.  A banner
>that is 5% better with improved favorability among readers may be better
>than a banner that is 20% better but with double the unfavorability.
>
>There are thousands of worthy projects that have expanded their budgets as
>far as they could, then expand in-your-face banners as far as they can,
>and only stop once their sites are quite difficult to use.   It happens
>gradually (I'm looking at you, Wikia ;) but the result is the usability
>equivalent of linkrot.  Let's not let WP end up like that.

I don't have much to add to what SJ wrote recently in a related thread.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

K. Peachey-2
I might have missed it, but I can't see any attribution for the image… as I
doubt it will be a click through to the file page.

Which style guide was used for the creation of this ad?
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Fæ
In reply to this post by wctaiwan-2
+1

A missed opportunity to celebrate one of our volunteer photographers,
especially considering the competitions that have included photographs
of food in the last year. Shame to fall back on stock photos and
commercial pro-photographers when we have our own massive project to
provide this as a free resource.

Fae

On 2 December 2015 at 14:46, John Mark Vandenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> "On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 6:14 PM, K. Peachey <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I might have missed it, but I can't see any attribution for the image… as I
>> doubt it will be a click through to the file page.
>
> I couldnt find the image in
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Cups_of_black_coffee
>
> The image is only on donate.wikimedia.org, uploaded by "BHouse
> (Trilogy)", which I assume means they are an employee of
> http://www.trilogyinteractive.com (see previous years Form 990):
>
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-price-overhead.jpg
>
> It appears to be a stock photo, by photographer Dimitrios Stefanidis.
>
> http://tineye.com/search/2267feed8737197d64056553011261b75ef34a9e/
>
> http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/coffee-on-white-25228505
>
> So my hopeful guess WMF bought a licence to the photograph, but even
> that would be inappropriate IMO.
>
> It wouldnt have been hard to make a free photo of a coffee, or even
> create a derivative of this lovely CC0 SVG
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cup_of_Coffee.svg
>
> (assuming the license is correct; I cant see CC0 on
> http://rejke.deviantart.com/art/Coffee-384565868)
>
> --
> John Vandenberg

--
[hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Todd Allen
Buying a photo, when we have ready access to massive amounts of freely
usable content, would be quite unacceptable and a misuse of funds, no
matter the amount of the funds. I hope someone can actually clarify what
happened here.

Also, the banner pops up, comes down, and covers most of the page. That's
really not acceptable. Wikimedia should follow acceptable ad practices,
which means a small and STATIC banner, not something that moves, shouts, or
otherwise interferes with page content. That should be done even if it
makes it less effective and raises less money, just to address the
inevitable butbutbut.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1
>
> A missed opportunity to celebrate one of our volunteer photographers,
> especially considering the competitions that have included photographs
> of food in the last year. Shame to fall back on stock photos and
> commercial pro-photographers when we have our own massive project to
> provide this as a free resource.
>
> Fae
>
> On 2 December 2015 at 14:46, John Mark Vandenberg <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > "On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 6:14 PM, K. Peachey <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> I might have missed it, but I can't see any attribution for the image…
> as I
> >> doubt it will be a click through to the file page.
> >
> > I couldnt find the image in
> >
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Cups_of_black_coffee
> >
> > The image is only on donate.wikimedia.org, uploaded by "BHouse
> > (Trilogy)", which I assume means they are an employee of
> > http://www.trilogyinteractive.com (see previous years Form 990):
> >
> > https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-price-overhead.jpg
> >
> > It appears to be a stock photo, by photographer Dimitrios Stefanidis.
> >
> > http://tineye.com/search/2267feed8737197d64056553011261b75ef34a9e/
> >
> > http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/coffee-on-white-25228505
> >
> > So my hopeful guess WMF bought a licence to the photograph, but even
> > that would be inappropriate IMO.
> >
> > It wouldnt have been hard to make a free photo of a coffee, or even
> > create a derivative of this lovely CC0 SVG
> >
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cup_of_Coffee.svg
> >
> > (assuming the license is correct; I cant see CC0 on
> > http://rejke.deviantart.com/art/Coffee-384565868)
> >
> > --
> > John Vandenberg
>
> --
> [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Andreas Kolbe-2
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Also, the banner pops up, comes down, and covers most of the page. That's
> really not acceptable. Wikimedia should follow acceptable ad practices,
> which means a small and STATIC banner, not something that moves, shouts, or
> otherwise interferes with page content. That should be done even if it
> makes it less effective and raises less money, just to address the
> inevitable butbutbut.



Well, to be fair, the Foundation seems to have done its homework on these
issues with last month's survey.[1]

When it comes to matters like banner intrusiveness, what matters most is
what the average reader thinks. Volunteers are not necessarily a
representative sample.

[1]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Todd Allen
That's nice. Do you want me to explicitly say "Volunteers are more
important than readers"? Alright. Volunteers (community members, or
dismissively, "power users") are way more important than readers. We're the
reason there are readers at all.
On Dec 2, 2015 9:20 AM, "Andreas Kolbe" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Also, the banner pops up, comes down, and covers most of the page. That's
> > really not acceptable. Wikimedia should follow acceptable ad practices,
> > which means a small and STATIC banner, not something that moves, shouts,
> or
> > otherwise interferes with page content. That should be done even if it
> > makes it less effective and raises less money, just to address the
> > inevitable butbutbut.
>
>
>
> Well, to be fair, the Foundation seems to have done its homework on these
> issues with last month's survey.[1]
>
> When it comes to matters like banner intrusiveness, what matters most is
> what the average reader thinks. Volunteers are not necessarily a
> representative sample.
>
> [1]
>
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Trillium Corsage
"Community" is a loaded term, because it is typically self-praisingly used by a relatively small number of administratively-oriented Wikipedians to describe themselves. It's basically WP:AN/ANI, Arbcom & associated access level seekers, and those who use Wikipedia as a social or socializing network. The vast majority of *content* editors, occasional or prolific, are completely unaware of this other side of Wikipedia. It's they who build the encyclopedia. I'd argue that where Wikipedia articles are good, it's a result of the content editors, not the administrative participants lauding themselves for riding herd on them.

Lila Tretikov has said that the proper definition of the Wikipedia "community" is *all* the editors, administrative participants, and readers. The administrative subset is not a *representative* subset of that. It's rather a self-selecting and much smaller subset with its own behaviors. You can see this recently I think, where in the current Arbcom elections, it has installed a filter to screen editors with less than 500 edits from asking questions of the candidates. I'm not aware that it has yet barred such editors from actually voting, but that would be the next step following its own logic. What the administrative component is doing is protecting its own influence and position by keeping these others out of the process.

Todd Allen took it a step farther below by proclaiming "community members" as "way more important than readers." Seems pretty brazen and non-inclusive to me, and illustrative of the attitudes of the administrative set.

Trillium Corsage


02.12.2015, 16:36, "Todd Allen" <email clipped>:

> That's nice. Do you want me to explicitly say "Volunteers are more
> important than readers"? Alright. Volunteers (community members, or
> dismissively, "power users") are way more important than readers. We're the
> reason there are readers at all.
> On Dec 2, 2015 9:20 AM, "Andreas Kolbe" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>  On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>  > Also, the banner pops up, comes down, and covers most of the page. That's
>>  > really not acceptable. Wikimedia should follow acceptable ad practices,
>>  > which means a small and STATIC banner, not something that moves, shouts,
>>  or
>>  > otherwise interferes with page content. That should be done even if it
>>  > makes it less effective and raises less money, just to address the
>>  > inevitable butbutbut.
>>
>>  Well, to be fair, the Foundation seems to have done its homework on these
>>  issues with last month's survey.[1]
>>
>>  When it comes to matters like banner intrusiveness, what matters most is
>>  what the average reader thinks. Volunteers are not necessarily a
>>  representative sample.
>>
>>  [1]
>>
>>  https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>  [hidden email]
>>  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>  <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Chris Koerner
In reply to this post by wctaiwan-2
In light of this recent conversation I found this quote to be of interest.

"Wikipedia readers tend not to be bothered by the fundraising messages they
see on Wikipedia. Two-thirds (67%) say they don’t mind them, and a majority
(55%) say they are not annoyed by these messages. Roughly equal shares of
readers do (44%) and don’t (41%) pay attention to these messages, according
to their self-reports."

From
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf

I'm merely presenting for reference.

Yours,
Chris Koerner
clkoerner.com
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Chris Keating-2
Yes, I also thought that was interesting. To invert the presentation of the
statistics, 33% of users did mind the banners and 45% were irritated by
them. These are actually quite high numbers in my view.

(Not to say that the decision to proceed with these banners is wrong, which
is a much more complicated topic, and full credit to the fundraising team
for firstly conducting and secondly publishing this research).

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Chris Koerner <[hidden email]> wrote:

> In light of this recent conversation I found this quote to be of interest.
>
> "Wikipedia readers tend not to be bothered by the fundraising messages they
> see on Wikipedia. Two-thirds (67%) say they don’t mind them, and a majority
> (55%) say they are not annoyed by these messages. Roughly equal shares of
> readers do (44%) and don’t (41%) pay attention to these messages, according
> to their self-reports."
>
> From
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
>
> I'm merely presenting for reference.
>
> Yours,
> Chris Koerner
> clkoerner.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Lisa Gruwell
Hi Chris-

A quick clarification on the invert numbers you mentioned.  These results
are on slide 27.  Here they are:

"I don't mind when I see fundraising messages on Wikipedia."
67% agree, 20% disagree, 12% had no opinion

"I am not annoyed when I see fundraising messages on Wikipedia."
55% agree, 27% disagree, 18% had no opinion

Thank you,
Lisa

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Chris Keating <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Yes, I also thought that was interesting. To invert the presentation of the
> statistics, 33% of users did mind the banners and 45% were irritated by
> them. These are actually quite high numbers in my view.
>
> (Not to say that the decision to proceed with these banners is wrong, which
> is a much more complicated topic, and full credit to the fundraising team
> for firstly conducting and secondly publishing this research).
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Chris Koerner <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > In light of this recent conversation I found this quote to be of
> interest.
> >
> > "Wikipedia readers tend not to be bothered by the fundraising messages
> they
> > see on Wikipedia. Two-thirds (67%) say they don’t mind them, and a
> majority
> > (55%) say they are not annoyed by these messages. Roughly equal shares of
> > readers do (44%) and don’t (41%) pay attention to these messages,
> according
> > to their self-reports."
> >
> > From
> >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
> >
> > I'm merely presenting for reference.
> >
> > Yours,
> > Chris Koerner
> > clkoerner.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Chris Keating-2
Ah yes, I see - my fault for skim-reading the summary rather than paying
attention to the tables. Thanks for pointing that out.

Chris

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Lisa Gruwell <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Chris-
>
> A quick clarification on the invert numbers you mentioned.  These results
> are on slide 27.  Here they are:
>
> "I don't mind when I see fundraising messages on Wikipedia."
> 67% agree, 20% disagree, 12% had no opinion
>
> "I am not annoyed when I see fundraising messages on Wikipedia."
> 55% agree, 27% disagree, 18% had no opinion
>
> Thank you,
> Lisa
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Chris Keating <[hidden email]
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Yes, I also thought that was interesting. To invert the presentation of
> the
> > statistics, 33% of users did mind the banners and 45% were irritated by
> > them. These are actually quite high numbers in my view.
> >
> > (Not to say that the decision to proceed with these banners is wrong,
> which
> > is a much more complicated topic, and full credit to the fundraising team
> > for firstly conducting and secondly publishing this research).
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Chris Koerner <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > In light of this recent conversation I found this quote to be of
> > interest.
> > >
> > > "Wikipedia readers tend not to be bothered by the fundraising messages
> > they
> > > see on Wikipedia. Two-thirds (67%) say they don’t mind them, and a
> > majority
> > > (55%) say they are not annoyed by these messages. Roughly equal shares
> of
> > > readers do (44%) and don’t (41%) pay attention to these messages,
> > according
> > > to their self-reports."
> > >
> > > From
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
> > >
> > > I'm merely presenting for reference.
> > >
> > > Yours,
> > > Chris Koerner
> > > clkoerner.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by Todd Allen
Hoi,
It is because of the readers that the work the volunteers do has a purpose.
Volunteers are typically intrinsically motivated but their motivation is
not necessarily focused on others. Some people are more focussed on
themselves. That is ok as it takes all sorts.

The question who is more important is hardly relevant, one cannot do
without the other. When it comes to donations though, it is the readers who
are more important. I for one do get messages from Jimmy and all he gets
from he is an additional edit or two.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On 2 December 2015 at 17:36, Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:

> That's nice. Do you want me to explicitly say "Volunteers are more
> important than readers"? Alright. Volunteers (community members, or
> dismissively, "power users") are way more important than readers. We're the
> reason there are readers at all.
> On Dec 2, 2015 9:20 AM, "Andreas Kolbe" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Also, the banner pops up, comes down, and covers most of the page.
> That's
> > > really not acceptable. Wikimedia should follow acceptable ad practices,
> > > which means a small and STATIC banner, not something that moves,
> shouts,
> > or
> > > otherwise interferes with page content. That should be done even if it
> > > makes it less effective and raises less money, just to address the
> > > inevitable butbutbut.
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, to be fair, the Foundation seems to have done its homework on these
> > issues with last month's survey.[1]
> >
> > When it comes to matters like banner intrusiveness, what matters most is
> > what the average reader thinks. Volunteers are not necessarily a
> > representative sample.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Pine W
Trillium, in the "administrative set", I think you'll find that almost all
of us produced content prior to our involvement in organizational matters.
Those of us who have formal roles wouldn't be trusted with keys to the
kingdom if we lacked track records of positive contributions to the
encyclopedia. The exceptions are for WMF staff and affiliate staff who
weren't hired from within the community; an ongoing issue is the need to
acculturate these staff into the ways of the Wiki and to educate them about
our (often complex) ways, while leveraging the value that they can bring to
Wikimedia organizations in areas like legal advocacy, visual design, press
communications, tech ops, etc.

Viewers, content contributors, funders, volunteer tech and organizational
leaders, and paid staff are all necessary parts of the Wikimedia ecosystem.
These groups and individuals interact in complex and intricate ways, and
changes to the ecosystem are always in motion.

Pine
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Lisa Gruwell
I thought this might be a good point in the conversation to share some of
the comments we have received from donors over the past day and a half. I
think they really appreciate all of your work:


Wikipedia has provided an unfathomable outlet for the inexhaustible chorus
of "why? why? why?" that has run through my brain since I was old enough to
think. I also believe its a factor in why I am currently in the eligible
Jeopardy! contestant pool. In short, thanks Wikipedia.

Wikipedia helps me almost daily, I cannot count the number of times me and
friends have been debating the answer to life, the universe and everything
(42, in case you were wondering!) and Wikipedia has dispelled the
discrepancies in one or more of our arguments. Thanks to wiki, we have been
able to convince each other we were wrong, and educate on topics we have
never considered. Wiki is very important, and for this I will continue to
donate as long as I can afford to. The more the world has open access to
information for free, the sooner mankind will get along. Wikipedia is
making the world a better place one article at a time. Thank you.

I've had a roadrunner and wild turkey with poults in my yard and I've used
Wiki to obtain information about them.

There was a time I used to get embarrassed due to lack of general
knowledge. Wikipedia gave me confidence. Thank you.

well, over time, using it became a reflex, like breathing but when i pause
to think about it, it is one of the source of knowledge I use most and I am
the better for it.

It's one of a tiny number of fund raising calls that I respond to. The
charter or quest of Wikipedia , I think is among the highest ideals that
humans can aspire to.

Wikipedia is the first point of call for any research i am performing,
especially on a new subject. It has been a life-saver on more than one
occasions

Wikipedia is part of my information ecosystem. It's like a road map for new
intellectual territory.

There was (more than) one time when I needed to know if some dumb obscure
TV actor from the 70s was still alive and Wikipedia was there for me. Plus
all the other times when I just need a quick bit of info: size of a
country's population, name of a president, details about a math function;
it's endless.

Helped me with my uni degree, gave me medical information on health
problems, let me learn new things about animals that I like :D Helps me
answer questions from my kid about the world that I want to give her, but
don't know the answers to

I think you're the only organisation that can fundraise that way and you
deserve it.

My older sister doesn't have a computer (she's 82), so we talk on the phone
and I look up stuff for her. It's a nice way to spend time with her, and it
brings us together

As a journalist and travel writer, this online research is often my first
port of call. For a quick scan of even just the most basic information
about a topic, I used to have to walk down to the basement of the national
television building I worked in to ask the archivist to dig out a series of
reference books that applied to my topic. Sometimes the books were already
in use by someone else, which meant I had to wait even longer or beg the
person to share the book with me. Now, I just Google it and often end up on
Wikipedia. While I always still double check everything I read on these
pages and use other sources for my actual fact finding, it no longer takes
hours or days to get started with my research

I've lost many bets because of wikipedia. So because of you I have looked
stupider than if you didn't exist

Wikipedia is the first step in any student's research. When it comes to
education, Wikipedia is the real MVP!

As a student, Wikipedia is a goldmine. I love you guys.

I use it for everything from government and politics to celebrities and tv
shows to authors and books. There's a facebook group I'm a part of called
"Cool Freaks' Wikipedia Club." People post weird, strange, interesting
wikipedia pages they've found. Basically, wikipedia is awesome! (I'd really
love there to be an accuracy scale though, since I usually end up
researching stuff after I read the wikipedia page, just to make sure it's
correct.)

I'm an engineer. I was not the smartest nor the dumbest in uni. I was
average and over the years I forget concepts/theories/formulae all the time
and I use Wikipedia to give my memory the nudge it needs to get back on
track. Thank you.

It is my main source of information.

Taking AP Physics in high school I would constantly get confused with all
of the unites and what they actually measured. Joules, watts, newton's,
difference between power and work. Lucky wiki saved that day with wonderful
articles that explained what everything meant. It helped me solidify my
foundation in physics, helping me to conquer a college level class at the
age of 16.

Keeps Me from lying awake at night wondering about past events & historical
data

it is just just always super handy

I see Wikipedia as my knowledgeable friend which knows everything on every
topic. For example, once I was really confused about red giants in
astronomy, but Wikipedia saved me.

life is better with it than without it.

One of the nicest things about Wikipedia is the explicit information about
local places -- especially for off-the-beaten-track places in the U.S.
which are overlooked by guide books. For example, when I had some spare
time in the SF Bay Area, I having a delightful adventure, finding an
obscure wine-tasting area and great descriptions of museums which match my
offbeat tastes, such as The Museum of Computer History in Mountain View,
California. It is also a great way to find public domain pictures for
lectures and to find out where my students are starting, as a baseline.

It is my "Encyclopedia"

Writing this I've just turned 28. I was perhaps among the first
schoolchildren to hear "Don't cite Wikipedia; it's unreliable as a source!"
by their teachers. Even back then in high school I knew that Wikipedia was
important. Before I had left for college I had started my own axiom -
"Wikipedia LEADS to the source!" I use Wikipedia every day of my life. I've
taken it as a natural given, like it is a simple fact of our daily lives
now. If I want to understand any subject with more clarity or depth (which
I almost always do) I type it into Wikipedia. I am continually using it
throughout the day to learn and re-learn and enrich my life. -but this is
just me. I fully believe that Wikipedia will be how the younger generations
will grow up in the future. In the past, kids would ask embarrassing
questions of their friends or family, or maybe not at all - questions of
sex and medical issues would torture young minds and could even lead to
trauma and great frustration...but now any child can access Wikipedia and
have the Whole of Human Knowledge at their fingertips to learn at their own
pace. With Wikipedia, we've become our own parents, teaching each other all
that we know; information is shared globally, and freely, in an unending
and beautiful cycle. Truly, as romantically tragic as it may sound,
Wikipedia is one of the few things that gives me hope for the future; as it
shows people coming together in such a glorious way.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Trillium, in the "administrative set", I think you'll find that almost all
> of us produced content prior to our involvement in organizational matters.
> Those of us who have formal roles wouldn't be trusted with keys to the
> kingdom if we lacked track records of positive contributions to the
> encyclopedia. The exceptions are for WMF staff and affiliate staff who
> weren't hired from within the community; an ongoing issue is the need to
> acculturate these staff into the ways of the Wiki and to educate them about
> our (often complex) ways, while leveraging the value that they can bring to
> Wikimedia organizations in areas like legal advocacy, visual design, press
> communications, tech ops, etc.
>
> Viewers, content contributors, funders, volunteer tech and organizational
> leaders, and paid staff are all necessary parts of the Wikimedia ecosystem.
> These groups and individuals interact in complex and intricate ways, and
> changes to the ecosystem are always in motion.
>
> Pine
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Pine W
Thanks Lisa.

More directly on the topic of fundraising banners, I appreciate that the
wording has been tweaked this year to address the major integrity concerns.
I can appreciate that fundraising is necessary for Wikipedia. It would be
nice to disrupt the user experience as little as possible, so one issue I
think should get a look going forward (if it hasn't already) is the size of
the banner in proportion to viewer screen size. Others have mentioned the
color issue. I suppose that the trick is to get the reader's attention
while minimizing the disruption to the content experience. It seems to me
that a moderately longer campaign in exchange for less intrusive banners
might be a good tradeoff.

I'm also continuing to hope that WMF will have a top-line budget freeze for
next year, which could take some pressure off of the online campaigns to
continue to grow income.

Pine
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
12