It works and isn't terribly invasive, and realistically financial difficulty will find sympathy right now. I think it's brilliant.

-----Original Message-----

From: "Erik Moeller" erik@wikimedia.org Subj: Re: [Foundation-l] Jimmy Wales donation appeal Date: Tue Dec 23, 2008 7:00 pm Size: 3K To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org

2008/12/23 effe iets anders effeietsanders@gmail.com:

Up to now, I kinda liked the fundraiser. Although they are very shouty for what I'm used to (I dislike the red button for instance and the somewhat agressive tone), I think this last change in message could use a *little* step back. Please use a slightly smaller font, an slightly less shouty text. To me it really reads like " wow, now we're really desperate, PLEASE COME READ THIS ** APPEAL". I would really appreciate it if this last banner would be done a little less in a way that comes to me (justified or not) as "typical American"...

Within the last 24 hours, we've raised a total of $283,859. That's more than 10 times as much as we made during a typical weekday in the last few days of the fundraiser, and the single highest day on record for community gifts. We don't know yet how steep the inevitable drop-off will be, but it's obvious that the appeal is working beyond everyone's expectations.

I think it's worth noting that this tenfold increase has been possible without the use of additional pixel real estate, without scrolling marquees, interstitials, or other serious interruptions of the Wikipedia reader/editor experience. All it took were less than 60 characters of text on each page in a highly visible font, linking to a personal appeal that makes our case in more detail.

We should ask ourselves why it is that based on the previous sitenotices, 9 in 10 people who would be clearly willing to give to us, did not do so. There seem to be at least three principal reasons for that:

* The previous messages were below the visibility threshold for most people: They considered them to be an unimportant part of the page that should be ignored.

* The previous messages did not, clearly enough, make a case for giving. They appealed to people who instantly "get" the non-profit donation model, but not to those for whom Wikipedia is essentially the same as any other website. The appeal directly addresses this distinction, to the satisfaction of a great number of people.

* Because it's a personal appeal, rather than an impersonal donation message, the letter seems more likely to resonate with people.

Regardless of how the numbers will hold up, it's clear that these are important lessons to take away: The appeal, compared to some of our other site-notices, was trivial to implement. It's more important to communicate clearly and in a personal manner what we're trying to do than to focus on widgets & designs.

Yes, more so than before, this appeal communicates a sense of urgency. As it should: We still have a revenue gap of $1.75M to just cover our expenses for the fiscal year (let alone increase our reserve). We're in the middle of the worst financial crisis in our lifetime; companies are failing or laying off staff around us. If people's reaction is "I don't want Wikipedia to go away - I better donate", that's not a bad thing.

Obviously we should try to work out any remaining display glitches. And I'm sure over time we'll find a "happy medium" when it comes to aspects like font size, color, etc. But more importantly, we should try to translate this appeal into as many languages as possible, as it's currently just running in the English language wikis.