In ten years time, I predict the Foundation will raise $3 billion: http://i.imgur.com/hdoAIan.jpg
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com Date: Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 9:01 PM Subject: $55 million raised in 2014 To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Happy new year: http://i.imgur.com/faPsI9J.jpg
Source: http://frdata.wikimedia.org/yeardata-day-vs-ytdsum.csv
I don't mind the banners, although I am still saddened that several hundred editor-submitted banners remain untested from six years ago, when the observed variance in the performance of those that were tested indicates that there are likely at least 15 which would do better than any of those which were tested. Why the heck is the fundraising team still ignoring all those untested submissions?
But as to the intrusiveness of the banners, I would rather have fade-in popups with fuschia <blink><marquee> text on a epileptic seizure-inducing background and auto-play audio than have the fundraising director claim that donations are decreasing to help justify "narrowing scope."
Best regards, James Salsman
Hoi, It is known that education is a great way to eradicate poverty. We know that Wikipedia brings information and is educational. When the effect of "your" 3 billion dollar brings education and effectively helps to eradicate poverty it is well worth it.
No irony intended. Thanks, GerardM
On 2 January 2015 at 09:11, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
In ten years time, I predict the Foundation will raise $3 billion: http://i.imgur.com/hdoAIan.jpg
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com Date: Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 9:01 PM Subject: $55 million raised in 2014 To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Happy new year: http://i.imgur.com/faPsI9J.jpg
Source: http://frdata.wikimedia.org/yeardata-day-vs-ytdsum.csv
I don't mind the banners, although I am still saddened that several hundred editor-submitted banners remain untested from six years ago, when the observed variance in the performance of those that were tested indicates that there are likely at least 15 which would do better than any of those which were tested. Why the heck is the fundraising team still ignoring all those untested submissions?
But as to the intrusiveness of the banners, I would rather have fade-in popups with fuschia <blink><marquee> text on a epileptic seizure-inducing background and auto-play audio than have the fundraising director claim that donations are decreasing to help justify "narrowing scope."
Best regards, James Salsman
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
3 billion being...above the upper bound of the extrapolation you've made? Uh-huh.
Extrapolation is not a particularly useful method to use for the budget, because it assumes endless exponential growth. I can see the budget increasing due to us increasingly taking on the responsibilities we've previously been unable to do anything about, but I can't see what we'd actually /do/ with 3 billion dollars (although if we want to expand the Hadoop cluster with most of that I would, of course, be most grateful ;p)
On 2 January 2015 at 04:23, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, It is known that education is a great way to eradicate poverty. We know that Wikipedia brings information and is educational. When the effect of "your" 3 billion dollar brings education and effectively helps to eradicate poverty it is well worth it.
No irony intended. Thanks, GerardM
On 2 January 2015 at 09:11, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
In ten years time, I predict the Foundation will raise $3 billion: http://i.imgur.com/hdoAIan.jpg
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com Date: Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 9:01 PM Subject: $55 million raised in 2014 To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Happy new year: http://i.imgur.com/faPsI9J.jpg
Source: http://frdata.wikimedia.org/yeardata-day-vs-ytdsum.csv
I don't mind the banners, although I am still saddened that several hundred editor-submitted banners remain untested from six years ago, when the observed variance in the performance of those that were tested indicates that there are likely at least 15 which would do better than any of those which were tested. Why the heck is the fundraising team still ignoring all those untested submissions?
But as to the intrusiveness of the banners, I would rather have fade-in popups with fuschia <blink><marquee> text on a epileptic seizure-inducing background and auto-play audio than have the fundraising director claim that donations are decreasing to help justify "narrowing scope."
Best regards, James Salsman
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Bah; dropped a digit when reading the y-axis. My bad. My concerns about straight extrapolation for this model remain, however.
On 2 January 2015 at 11:31, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org wrote:
3 billion being...above the upper bound of the extrapolation you've made? Uh-huh.
Extrapolation is not a particularly useful method to use for the budget, because it assumes endless exponential growth. I can see the budget increasing due to us increasingly taking on the responsibilities we've previously been unable to do anything about, but I can't see what we'd actually /do/ with 3 billion dollars (although if we want to expand the Hadoop cluster with most of that I would, of course, be most grateful ;p)
On 2 January 2015 at 04:23, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, It is known that education is a great way to eradicate poverty. We know that Wikipedia brings information and is educational. When the effect of "your" 3 billion dollar brings education and effectively helps to eradicate poverty it is well worth it.
No irony intended. Thanks, GerardM
On 2 January 2015 at 09:11, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
In ten years time, I predict the Foundation will raise $3 billion: http://i.imgur.com/hdoAIan.jpg
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com Date: Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 9:01 PM Subject: $55 million raised in 2014 To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Happy new year: http://i.imgur.com/faPsI9J.jpg
Source: http://frdata.wikimedia.org/yeardata-day-vs-ytdsum.csv
I don't mind the banners, although I am still saddened that several hundred editor-submitted banners remain untested from six years ago, when the observed variance in the performance of those that were tested indicates that there are likely at least 15 which would do better than any of those which were tested. Why the heck is the fundraising team still ignoring all those untested submissions?
But as to the intrusiveness of the banners, I would rather have fade-in popups with fuschia <blink><marquee> text on a epileptic seizure-inducing background and auto-play audio than have the fundraising director claim that donations are decreasing to help justify "narrowing scope."
Best regards, James Salsman
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
-- Oliver Keyes Research Analyst Wikimedia Foundation
wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org