http://identi.ca/tag/wikipediafundraisingslogans http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23wikipediafundraisingslogans
Mine: "Give us the money or your homework gets it"
- d.
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 06:13:14PM +0000, David Gerard wrote:
http://identi.ca/tag/wikipediafundraisingslogans http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23wikipediafundraisingslogans
Some of those are very funny and inventive, though I don't think the majority of them would really work to be honest, especially not yours David, I'm sorry to say. :P
Isabell
Isabell Long wrote:
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 06:13:14PM +0000, David Gerard wrote:
http://identi.ca/tag/wikipediafundraisingslogans http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23wikipediafundraisingslogans
Some of those are very funny and inventive, though I don't think the majority of them would really work to be honest, especially not yours David, I'm sorry to say. :P
You never know. If some of the slogans are cheekily engaging, some would like that. And even if they don't drive donations on their own, they may reduce ad blindness and so raise the effectiveness of the campaign.
People are doing some interesting work with auto-optimized ad runs that we could look at adapting for next year. Given our massive amounts of traffic, we could accept a pretty broad range of slogans, and let the system sort out which are the most effective combinations. Money aside, there's something appealing about maximizing community involvement everywhere we can.
William
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:26 AM, William Pietri william@scissor.com wrote:
People are doing some interesting work with auto-optimized ad runs that we could look at adapting for next year. Given our massive amounts of traffic, we could accept a pretty broad range of slogans, and let the system sort out which are the most effective combinations. Money aside, there's something appealing about maximizing community involvement everywhere we can.
Ew. Is that really what advertising and marketing have been reduced to? Spew out whatever random text as long as it gets the $$$? Please let us have some self-respect.
Steve
No, self-respect in advertising is about not actually lying about the product, making $$$ by whatever cost effective means is what it's always and *only* been about.
The only thing I will say about the current campaign, it's not about Wikipedia Forever, it's about Wikipedia until-the-next-fund-raiser. If it was forever, that might actually be worth contributing to.
On 14/11/2009, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:26 AM, William Pietri william@scissor.com wrote:
People are doing some interesting work with auto-optimized ad runs that we could look at adapting for next year. Given our massive amounts of traffic, we could accept a pretty broad range of slogans, and let the system sort out which are the most effective combinations. Money aside, there's something appealing about maximizing community involvement everywhere we can.
Ew. Is that really what advertising and marketing have been reduced to? Spew out whatever random text as long as it gets the $$$? Please let us have some self-respect.
Steve
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 6:44 AM, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:26 AM, William Pietri william@scissor.com wrote:
People are doing some interesting work with auto-optimized ad runs that we could look at adapting for next year. Given our massive amounts of traffic, we could accept a pretty broad range of slogans, and let the system sort out which are the most effective combinations. Money aside, there's something appealing about maximizing community involvement everywhere we can.
Ew. Is that really what advertising and marketing have been reduced to? Spew out whatever random text as long as it gets the $$$? Please let us have some self-respect.
Steve
I think self-respect is a luxury for us folks who don't have to worry about meeting fundraising goals. All those servers and all that bandwidth isn't free. These ads were bad, but they're improving. I think we ought to be willing to accept some fundraising once a year if we can keep it in mind that these fundraising drives keep corporate advertizing off Wikipedia. That alone ought to put this in perspective.
- causa sui
everywhere we can.
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 6:44 AM, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com
Ew. Is that really what advertising and marketing have been reduced to? Spew out whatever random text as long as it gets the $$$? Please let us have some self-respect.
Steve
on 11/14/09 6:54 PM, Ryan Delaney at ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
I think self-respect is a luxury for us folks who don't have to worry about meeting fundraising goals. All those servers and all that bandwidth isn't free. These ads were bad, but they're improving. I think we ought to be willing to accept some fundraising once a year if we can keep it in mind that these fundraising drives keep corporate advertizing off Wikipedia. That alone ought to put this in perspective.
- causa sui
Self-respect is a luxury!?! - some commodity to put a price on!?!. A person's attitude toward his self-respect is clearly reflected in how he presents himself.
Marc Riddell
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.netwrote:
everywhere we can.
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 6:44 AM, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com
Ew. Is that really what advertising and marketing have been reduced to? Spew out whatever random text as long as it gets the $$$? Please let us have some self-respect.
Steve
on 11/14/09 6:54 PM, Ryan Delaney at ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
I think self-respect is a luxury for us folks who don't have to worry
about
meeting fundraising goals. All those servers and all that bandwidth isn't free. These ads were bad, but they're improving. I think we ought to be willing to accept some fundraising once a year if we can keep it in mind that these fundraising drives keep corporate advertizing off Wikipedia.
That
alone ought to put this in perspective.
- causa sui
Self-respect is a luxury!?! - some commodity to put a price on!?!. A person's attitude toward his self-respect is clearly reflected in how he presents himself.
I'll be right behind you when you start the socialist revolution (seriously), but I don't think Wikipedia will be the starting point.
- causa sui
on 11/14/09 7:28 PM, Ryan Delaney at ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.netwrote:
everywhere we can.
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 6:44 AM, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com
Ew. Is that really what advertising and marketing have been reduced to? Spew out whatever random text as long as it gets the $$$? Please let us have some self-respect.
Steve
on 11/14/09 6:54 PM, Ryan Delaney at ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
I think self-respect is a luxury for us folks who don't have to worry
about
meeting fundraising goals. All those servers and all that bandwidth isn't free. These ads were bad, but they're improving. I think we ought to be willing to accept some fundraising once a year if we can keep it in mind that these fundraising drives keep corporate advertizing off Wikipedia.
That
alone ought to put this in perspective.
- causa sui
Self-respect is a luxury!?! - some commodity to put a price on!?!. A person's attitude toward his self-respect is clearly reflected in how he presents himself.
I'll be right behind you when you start the socialist revolution (seriously), but I don't think Wikipedia will be the starting point.
Ryan, your confusing socialism with individualism - they're not in the same universe. Some of the most effective teams I have seen working together are made up of individuals with self-respect, and the ability to respect another. And, yes, there are examples of this working behind the scenes on the guts of this Project - the Encyclopedia - at this very moment. That's the public face this Project needs to emphasize in its public outreach.
Marc
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
I think self-respect is a luxury for us folks who don't have to worry about meeting fundraising goals. All those servers and all that bandwidth isn't free. These ads were bad, but they're improving. I think we ought to be willing to accept some fundraising once a year if we can keep it in mind that these fundraising drives keep corporate advertizing off Wikipedia. That alone ought to put this in perspective.
Yeah, but you're implying a false dichotomy of EITHER "we put up with all manner of tacky, tasteless slogans, leaving all choices to the PR team" OR "Wikipedia fails to meet its fundraising goals and goes off the air".
There are many possibilities in between. Perhaps its fundraising goals have become more ambitious recently. Didn't we read somewhere that the annual maintenance costs are met in the first few days of each fundraising season?
Steve
Steve Bennett wrote:
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:26 AM, William Pietri william@scissor.com wrote:
People are doing some interesting work with auto-optimized ad runs that we could look at adapting for next year. Given our massive amounts of traffic, we could accept a pretty broad range of slogans, and let the system sort out which are the most effective combinations. Money aside, there's something appealing about maximizing community involvement everywhere we can.
Ew. Is that really what advertising and marketing have been reduced to? Spew out whatever random text as long as it gets the $$$? Please let us have some self-respect.
Hm. I'm not quite sure how you got that from my comment.
David pointed us to a variety of clever slogans written by the public. Isabell was speculating that most of them wouldn't work. I'm just saying that we don't have to speculate; we can run all the ones that don't seem blatantly counterproductive, and find out how well they do. Even better, we can automatically optimize which we show and how.
That's not to say we can't depart from the most effective options if we want to. But it seems like a good place to start.
William
2009/11/15 William Pietri william@scissor.com:
David pointed us to a variety of clever slogans written by the public. Isabell was speculating that most of them wouldn't work. I'm just saying that we don't have to speculate; we can run all the ones that don't seem blatantly counterproductive, and find out how well they do. Even better, we can automatically optimize which we show and how. That's not to say we can't depart from the most effective options if we want to. But it seems like a good place to start.
It is not in fact that easy - because every slogan has to be translated into a pile of languages (by volunteers), and every banner has to be tested thoroughly in all translations (some this year broke in IE6/7). So there really isn't that much room to move. Erik Moeller posted about this on the wiki, explaining in detail what's going on, but I can't find the link right now.
- d.
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 9:41 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
that we don't have to speculate; we can run all the ones that don't seem blatantly counterproductive, and find out how well they do. Even better,
It is not in fact that easy - because every slogan has to be translated into a pile of languages (by volunteers), and every banner has to be tested thoroughly in all translations (some this year broke in IE6/7). So there really isn't that much room to move. Erik Moeller
---------- ~~~>>We don't have to speculate if this bacteria can live in low pressure; we can try it.
~~~>It's not easy at all! It will cost trillions to lift the test apparatus into orbit and get it onto a path to mars. Then we have to consider the cost to get the scientists there!
~~~Um. Why not try it in a lab. On Earth. ---------
Er. David. Why not test the messages to the extent that doing so is easy, and leave the trouble of the full deployment for messages demonstrated to actually perform?
It's also pretty likely that different messages will perform differently in different places. If we were really getting smart about this we should be predicting the most likely clicked message based on which *article* the reader is viewing (based on its categories). ... tracking it separately for different *languages* is an obvious first step.
Make it possible to request a particular entry with the right url while it is out of rotation... and put up a browser compatibility checklist. Let the community get test coverage if they want their messages seen, they could do worse than wikimedia's prior "well it worked in safari" testing.
And, frankly, if the message is only shown to 1:1000 viewers it would still get good click-testing coverage but if it caused some minor hiccups in corner cases the world would not end.
2009/11/15 David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com:
It is not in fact that easy - because every slogan has to be translated into a pile of languages (by volunteers), and every banner has to be tested thoroughly in all translations
The foundation doesn't agree with you there. Well that or it has worryingly low standards of failure.
Translation is not universally desirable as we found out with the "It looks like something the GDR would produce" problem this year.
(some this year broke in IE6/7). So there really isn't that much room to move.
From the POV of the community fixing such things isn't hard. It
doesn't have to wait for San Francisco to wake up to admit there is a problem. Remember "with enough eyes all bugs are shallow". Community has a lot of eyes and is unlikely to object to fixing them.
David Gerard wrote:
2009/11/15 William Pietri william@scissor.com:
[...] I'm just saying that we don't have to speculate; we can run all the ones that don't seem blatantly counterproductive, and find out how well they do. Even better, we can automatically optimize which we show and how. [...]
It is not in fact that easy - because every slogan has to be translated into a pile of languages (by volunteers), and every banner has to be tested thoroughly in all translations (some this year broke in IE6/7). So there really isn't that much room to move. Erik Moeller posted about this on the wiki, explaining in detail what's going on, but I can't find the link right now.
Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting this approach for this year, but for future years.
As others have pointed out, you could do this incrementally. If a slogan doesn't test well in its native language, there's no reason to go to the trouble of translating it. And even if it does, it may not be particularly translatable, so I think translating is something could be optional, based either on central expert judgment or the individual judgment of volunteer translators.
As to browser testing, I think we should be able to abstract formats from content enough to make sure that the containers get tested thoroughly, while providing enough flexibility to those suggesting content. Quite a lot of people have the skills to come up with a clever line, a clever image, or a basic mix of the two, and those formats would be easy to constrain and browser test.
That would leave out some of the more esoteric format possibilities, but I think that's ok; this would still be a step forward in terms of engaging the community and the wider public, and I suspect ad format innovation is anyhow not something where we want to be on the forefront.
William
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Isabell Long isabell121@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 06:13:14PM +0000, David Gerard wrote:
http://identi.ca/tag/wikipediafundraisingslogans http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23wikipediafundraisingslogans
Some of those are very funny and inventive, though I don't think the majority of them would really work to be honest, especially not yours David, I'm sorry to say. :P
Isabell
Yeah. There's probably a law against painful truths in advertising. ('Everyone you know and love will one day die and turn into wormfood. Before that happens, wouldn't you like to give them something? Absolut. 80-proof against morality.')
David Gerard wrote:
http://identi.ca/tag/wikipediafundraisingslogans http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23wikipediafundraisingslogans
Mine: "Give us the money or your homework gets it"
"Wikipedia fundraiser: time to put coins in your factual jukebox."
Charles
"Wikipedia fundraiser: time to put coins in >your factual jukebox."
{{cn}}
LOL!
On 11/9/09, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
http://identi.ca/tag/wikipediafundraisingslogans http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23wikipediafundraisingslogans
Mine: "Give us the money or your homework gets it"
"Wikipedia fundraiser: time to put coins in your factual jukebox."
Charles
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l