Oldak Quill wrote:
On 23/10/2007, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
So, bottom line, we need money to operate the websites and to do more as well. Those of you who were already wikipedians 3 years ago (or worse :-)) will remember a time where the site was slow and sometimes dead. Hopefully, though we grew enormously, your editing experience is now good 99% of the time. This does not come from nowhere. There are people working to make sure that we provide you the best editing and reading environment.
Most of the people objecting to the banner are not objecting to a banner in principle (and certainly not objecting to fundraising). The issue is with the way it looks and was carried out. You seem to be presenting this issue as binary: scrolling advert or the death of Wikimedia.
I am not sure who is "you", but it is definitly not "me" :-) I was not in the team who worked on the fundraiser, except for global messages issues. But no, I would not say it is binary. Proof being that in the next hours following the set up of the sitenotice, several changes were brought. On my computer, the text is no more scrolling, and a dismiss link has been added. I know there was work as well on Jimmy's video (which I first saw 48 hours ago). There might be other changes as well, but I do not immediately see them.
Some people are saying the banner is distracting, ugly and wasn't done with enough communication. Shouldn't the discussion be about those things and whether any of them present problems?
Yeah, no problem. The problem is not really that there was not enough communication (there is never enough communication anyway), but rather that people do not really get involved and comment until the stuff is right up in their nose. But hey, that's a wiki. We can change stuff.
Ant