It could be worse. Internet archive is running their banners at moment. Quote:
"Internet Archive is a non-profit. We don’t run ads, but still need to pay for servers and staff. If everyone reading this gave $75, we could end our fundraiser right now. For the cost of buying a book, you can make a book permanently available for the next generation. It’s is a small amount to inform millions. Help us do more. Thank you."
Sorry, $75? :)
They also give a shoutout to WMF for making the fundraising banner open source. Thanks for nothing WMF for making this intrusive begging the future of online fundraising. ;)
Russavia
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 2:11 AM, phoebe ayers phoebe.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all,
I just re-read this whole thread (!) this morning and here are the themes of points raised that I'm seeing ... I'll add this to the talk of https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_principles too.
Anything else I missed? My editorializing is in brackets [ ].
==communication re: fundraising season==
- develop banner approaches in the off-season [the fundraising team
already does this, but there's desire for community discussion too]
- if you do something new (in a geography etc.) make sure you
communicate it to the stakeholders
- fundraising team seen as sometimes unresponsive [though acknowledged
that this, the en.wp fundraiser, is their biggest crunch week]
- Also many thanks for the acknowledged very efficient, remarkable job
at fundraising to the team; "The fundraising team is amazing at their jobs"
==message content==
- don't mislead about ads: potential implication that if we don't get
the money we'll run ads is not ok [agreed.]
- don't mislead about WMF finances: potential implication that we'll
go off the air immediately if you don't donate is not ok [note, I'm not seeing this in the current message, but I may not be seeing it because every fundraising appeal I've ever gotten is crouched in crisis terms.]
- message sounds like an obituary/doesn't sound like an obituary/is
clear/is too American [the latter is a problem esp. with English Wikipedia messaging, I suspect]
- comments about emails, too [note, previous donors get 1 email a year]
- comment that 1/fundraiser a year is not true for those unlucky souls
who get a/b tested
- as contributors, we want to be proud of Wikimedia, and not
demotivated by the banners. some find the fundraising demotivating because of above points.
==banner size==
- pop-ups are no good [pretty clear consensus]
- sticky banners no good [I'm not sure if there's consensus on this point]
- banners that obscure content are no good [note, though we agree on
the principle, I am personally skeptical about the claim of this banner interfering with our mission; the content is still right there]
- mobile banners too big, x to dismiss too small
==brand image==
- current messages are seen as harming brand image because of above
content points
- harming brand image is not ok [I think we're all agreed on this]
- messages should encourage people to contribute content as well [def.
worth exploring]
- user sentiment analysis is important [possible action point: maybe
user sentiment re: brand should be more highly weighted in the banner tests?]
- what would happen if donors were shown financials alongside banners?
[note this seems very impractical to me. The majority of donors do not have experience with big nonprofit finances or a scope of comparison. Yes, I look at the 990s of charities I give to, but I suspect I'm unusual in that way].
==data==
- we want all the data, because we are Wikipedians
- especially .. user sentiment methodology & raw data
- social media reaction: it seems very negative/more negative than
past??/how much is there/should we worry about it?
- how many impressions do people see? Is it really less? [note, we've
been trying to optimize for fewer impressions for a long while, hence the shorter fundraiser]
Other questions for me: Nemo asks about minutes. I suspect they'll be out in a couple of weeks, and then there will be a week of delay or so as the board approves them. All delays are on the trustee end, not on the secretary's end. Note though that I already summarized probably the most exciting discussion.
Andreas asks about the editor survey report. I looked through my papers the last time you asked, and I don't think I have it. I'd send it to you if I did.
best, Phoebe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe