Steve Bennett wrote:
mav wrote:
Well, current appeal could be called "begging". As Mav explained already, we are far from having enough right now to fulfill our first trimester needs. And we finished the year on our reserves. So, "begging" makes sense.
Sensible, but tacky. (IMVHO).
I got an email yesterday from an editor upset with the tacky begging notices on every page, compared with the ArbCom election only being advertised on the watchlists and recent changes ... neither of which I actually use, and in fact I frequently advocate that wikistressed editors abandon using a watchlist at all. I haven't used mine since 2004 and I'm much happier that way ;-)
It's a tricky one ... how to ask for money we're *really desperately in need of*.
The problems associated with "selling hard copies" are
- making a partnership with a firm or organisation to
"produce the hard copy" and then to "distribute" the content. Or should we set up another organisation to do that ourselves ?
Surely online publishers would lap it up if someone did the hard work of filtering and cleaning up first.
The discussions so far seem to be ignoring that this has already happened, and successfully for everyone involved, with de:. Can we do that with en:? I'd REALLY LOVE TO!
- d.
Only putting it on watchlists and recent changes would exclude anons and certain newbies, which is good for arbcom elections but not for fundraisers. A lot of funds comes from people who find Wikipedia useful, but don't edit themselves.
I don't consider it begging. I'm sure they'd be more upset with constant adverts instead of occasional fundraiser notices.
Mgm
On 1/10/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Steve Bennett wrote:
mav wrote:
Well, current appeal could be called "begging". As Mav explained already, we are far from having enough right now to fulfill our first trimester needs. And we finished the year on our reserves. So, "begging" makes sense.
Sensible, but tacky. (IMVHO).
I got an email yesterday from an editor upset with the tacky begging notices on every page, compared with the ArbCom election only being advertised on the watchlists and recent changes ... neither of which I actually use, and in fact I frequently advocate that wikistressed editors abandon using a watchlist at all. I haven't used mine since 2004 and I'm much happier that way ;-)
It's a tricky one ... how to ask for money we're *really desperately in need of*.
The problems associated with "selling hard copies" are
- making a partnership with a firm or organisation to
"produce the hard copy" and then to "distribute" the content. Or should we set up another organisation to do that ourselves ?
Surely online publishers would lap it up if someone did the hard work of filtering and cleaning up first.
The discussions so far seem to be ignoring that this has already happened, and successfully for everyone involved, with de:. Can we do that with en:? I'd REALLY LOVE TO!
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 1/10/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Only putting it on watchlists and recent changes would exclude anons and certain newbies, which is good for arbcom elections but not for fundraisers. A lot of funds comes from people who find Wikipedia useful, but don't edit themselves.
I don't consider it begging. I'm sure they'd be more upset with constant adverts instead of occasional fundraiser notices.
Mgm
I'm sure others disagree, but I'd certainly prefer targetted advertisements to begging for money, especially since there's no "I just gave you money two days ago now stop bothering me" button.
I was under the impression that the fundraising objectives for the quarter were achieved. What becomes tacky is continuing to post these notices (including Jimbo's appeal letter) after the objectives have been reached and the pre-determined fundraising period has ended. If someone miscalculated the needs, they should be adjusted next time around.
Ec
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
Only putting it on watchlists and recent changes would exclude anons and certain newbies, which is good for arbcom elections but not for fundraisers. A lot of funds comes from people who find Wikipedia useful, but don't edit themselves.
I don't consider it begging. I'm sure they'd be more upset with constant adverts instead of occasional fundraiser notices.
Mgm
On 1/10/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Steve Bennett wrote:
mav wrote:
Well, current appeal could be called "begging". As Mav explained already, we are far from having enough right now to fulfill our first trimester needs. And we finished the year on our reserves. So, "begging" makes sense.
On 1/10/06, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
I was under the impression that the fundraising objectives for the quarter were achieved. What becomes tacky is continuing to post these notices (including Jimbo's appeal letter) after the objectives have been reached and the pre-determined fundraising period has ended. If someone miscalculated the needs, they should be adjusted next time around.
Ec
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Sitenotice
-- geni
geni wrote:
On 1/10/06, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
I was under the impression that the fundraising objectives for the quarter were achieved. What becomes tacky is continuing to post these notices (including Jimbo's appeal letter) after the objectives have been reached and the pre-determined fundraising period has ended. If someone miscalculated the needs, they should be adjusted next time around.
Ec
See:
I wasn't looking for techniques for removing the banner. I've learned to ignore it. Tackiness is not just a matter of how it impresses me personally.
Ec
On 1/10/06, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
geni wrote:
On 1/10/06, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
I was under the impression that the fundraising objectives for the quarter were achieved. What becomes tacky is continuing to post these notices (including Jimbo's appeal letter) after the objectives have been reached and the pre-determined fundraising period has ended. If someone miscalculated the needs, they should be adjusted next time around.
Ec
See:
I wasn't looking for techniques for removing the banner. I've learned to ignore it. Tackiness is not just a matter of how it impresses me personally.
Ec
I was suggesting that as a venue to complain.
-- geni