On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 5:55 PM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:
The banners may be effective, but they're not
aligned with Wikimedia's
I wouldn't come out quite as strongly against these banners, but I share
the underlying sentiment.
I agree that the urgency and alarm of the copy is not commensurate with my
(admittedly limited) understanding of our financial situation. Could we run
a survey that places the banner copy alongside a concise statement of the
Foundation's financials, and which asks the respondent to indicate whether
they regard the copy as misleading.
Quantitative assessments of fundraising strategy ought to consider impact
on all assets, tangible or not. This includes the Foundation's goodwill and
reputation, which are (by common wisdom) easy to squander and hard to
repair. It is critical that we be maximally deliberate on this matter.
In addition to the survey suggested above, I want to also propose that we:
(a) solicit input from a neutral reputation management consultancy, and
(b) create a forum for staffers to talk openly about this matter, without
fear of reprisal
All that being said, since this is a tough thread, and since it is
Thanksgiving weekend here in the US, it is a good opportunity to express
how much I appreciate the work of the fundraising team. Banners are never
going to be popular and it must be tough as hell to do this work while
fielding rants and grumbles from everybody and their cousin. I consider it
a stroke of cosmic luck that I get paid to work on Wikipedia and its sister
projects, and I am grateful to you for making that possible.