Gerard,
Do you think the banners *have* to paint a mental picture of Wikipedia
being in dire financial straits for people to donate? With wordings like
"We need you to make a donation this Friday so that we can continue to
protect Wikipedia's independence"?
Isn't it pretty bizarre to portray your financial situation in this way,
when you're planning to increase your expenses by 40% from one year to the
next, and are literally taking 10 times more money from the public per
annum than you did ten years ago?
It's not about the money per se – there are surely few people and
organisations who would say that they couldn't do with some more money than
the amount they have – but about whether you give the public and
prospective donors a more or less accurate impression of your financial
situation and your spending intentions.
Do you think the current fundraising banners do that?
Andreas
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 2:50 PM Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi,
No it is not. When we do not find a solution for the technical issues
for Wikidata it will crash and burn..
The ferocity that some people display about the WMF fundraising
astounds me. We are operating one of the biggest websites in the world, it
is hugely problematic in that its bias for English prevents us from
providing a service that is of the same quality for everyone. The legacy
that exists in our code and the rising expectations are obvious signs that
we are under investing, not over investing. There is a limit to the growth
of our organisation as such I applaud the WMF even though it could and
should be so much better.
On Fri, 24 Sept 2021 at 15:25, Vi to <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> This is exactly the previously mentioned idea of "collect money, then
> we will find a way to spend it".
> Instead, we should be honest with donors and volunteers, the urgency
> portrayed by banners is not true, there's no risk of closing our projects.
>
> *Assumes that there is only one project* is true, but in terms of
> current fundraising communication.
>
> Vito
>
>
> Il giorno ven 24 set 2021 alle ore 14:50 Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
>> Hoi,
>> There are some people who repeatedly argue that we raise way too much
>> money. Given a set of assumptions an argument can be constructed to make
>> this point. In my opinion there is little merit to the argument. We do need
>> money to operate the Wikimedia projects and a positive outcome per year
>> enables us to do more.the next year. I have some ideas about raising money
>> and raising expectations.
>>
>> - We want to raise less money in the Anglo-Saxon world. When
>> people donate money everywhere they too will gain a sense of ownership.
>> This sense of ownership is to be distributed more equally around the globe
>> - With our projects owned more equitably around the globe, the
>> notion that "any child of nine year old can find pictures in
Commons" is
>> reasonable and self-evident; the world pays for results that
>> are globally relevant ..
>> - We need a delivery manager, his/her task is to research and
>> define what it is our projects deliver to their public. The objective is to
>> increase both quantity and quality of what is delivered by a project and
>> discuss with project communities what it is that can be done to improve the
>> service to its public. Commons does provide material to Wikipedia, that is
>> good but not enough.
>>
>> Both the Wikimedia Foundation and the Internet Archive have projects
>> to document all scientific papers / output. The Internet Archive provides
>> an important service to the Wikimedia Foundation and we can integrate the
>> two projects, reduce costs and have the WMF pay the IA for its services.
>> Closer ties with the Internet Archive provide many other benefits. One of
>> these benefits is that we can bring the Wikipedia references into a modern
>> age.
>>
>> For Wikidata there is a technical limit in what we can achieve on the
>> current platform. Because of Wikidata the WMF is a very big fish in the
>> data pond. We need to (imho) pick up the challenge and develop our own
>> software. This will cost significantly and it demonstrates that we accept
>> that Free software is not Free as in Beer. With the IA as a partner, we may
>> find a partner in this endeavour.
>>
>> The notion that we raise too much money, the notion that there is no
>> urgency is a fallacy. It is all too easy to identify how our service is
>> lacking and where we can improve our service. The arguments why the WMF
>> raises too much money assumes that there is only one project, their project
>> and they consider that its status quo suffices. The question is, sufficient
>> for who,for what and for how long.
>> Thanks,
>> GerardM
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org,
>> guidelines at:
>>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org,
> guidelines at:
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org,
guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
at: