I think the current messages are quite good and clear, the ones I've seen
get better each year.
I don't find the messaging alarmist or misleading. But perhaps subtle cues
can change how they are perceived.
[I also don't usually get this feedback from people outside our community
(last: in 2012), so it might just be random walks through feedback space.]
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 7:30 PM Michel Vuijlsteke <wikipedia(a)zog.org> wrote:
This discussion comes back every year. Every year we
get the same
reassurance that it's being looked into, that we'll try to do better, that
things have been tested, etc.
The reality of the matter is that the alarmist and misleading stuff
*works*. And that it's most probably not going anywhere. Just like last
year and the year before.
On Wed, 18 Dec 2019, 22:58 Samuel Klein, <meta.sj(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I've heard this asked this by 3-4 people
recently
* A family member (checking in to make sure things were ok)
* A local grantmaker (who likewise has supported WP at least once before)
* A couple undergrads (on phones, asking eachother what to do if WP went
down during finals)
All worried either that there had bee some sudden change, or that
knowledge
or access would be lost in the near future.
Perhaps there's a way to
reach
the same people while highlighting our commitment
to persistent access to
knowledge across time. And maybe a way to measure interpretation or
reaction to a banner in addition to its conversion rate. [Some banners
are
so delightful that they are a welcome improvement
to a page without; and
I've occasionally thought we should run some of those, w/ low
probability,
continuously year-round.]
Wikilove,
SJ
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 4:38 PM Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Sadly I had a similar experience only this weekend.
>
> We were enjoying a going away lunch with friends who are out of the
> country over Christmas, when one of them asked about Wikipedia's
> problems, knowing that I often volunteer time to it. He claimed that
> the site was spamming screen-sized pop-up banners trying to raise
> money because they were going bust. I had to advise him how wealthy
> the Foundation was, with hundreds of staff and extra cash in an
> endowment fund.
>
> Isn't it about time that the Wikimedia Foundation came to terms that
> /plenty/ of money is made through sensible fundraising, without every
> year embarrassing the whole Wikimedia Community by promoting the
> impression that Wikipedia is about to close down if the public don't
> give them enough money to keep their servers powered up over
> Christmas? Making 10% more money every year is growth for the sake of
> it unless we can understand in an accountable and transparent way
> where that extra 10% is needed; preferably right there in the
> fundraising banner so folks don't get the impression that Wikipedia is
> about to vanish.
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
>
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 20:34, Jacob Jose <jacob.jose(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I also felt like how Benjamin's dad did.. If one is viewing using
the
>
mobile app, the red banners fill the entire screen and one has to
scroll
> down to get to the content. I think the fund
solicitation ads need to
be
> much less loud than it's now..
>
> Background: I have been an active Wiki contributor for over 10 years
now.
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 2:27 PM Benjamin Ikuta <
benjaminikuta(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
> My dad recently said to me:
>
> "I was solitated by them after looking something up. I thought it
strange
> > the way they were pleading for donations. They made it sound like
they
> > > might be shutting down if we the general public didn't donate."
> > >
> > > Has there been any research into how common it is for readers to
get
the
> wrong impression from the marketing
messaging?
>
> I've heard of this sort of thing happening before, and I think it's
highly
> > antithetical to our values to be deceptive.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
_______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
faewik(a)gmail.com
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529
4266
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266