Dear Lisa, Megan and all,

The current issue of the Signpost contains an interview about my recent Daily Dot article on WMF fundraising.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2021-06-27/Forum

The piece has sparked quite substantial discussion, and there is a pretty good consensus on the fundraising issue in the comments. Here are representative excerpts of what people have said:

"I agree with Smallbones that one should raise funds before the situation becomes dire, but they should be raised *honestly*. Portraying the situation as dire when it isn't is dishonest and unethical."

"I also feel that the WMF is too pushy with its donation advertising, and I am far from the only OTRS (VRT) agent who hates December because of some distinctly distressing emails we get along these lines. I have also talked to a number of WMF staffers on the topic, though I suspect they'd struggle to go on the record on the issue, who share the concerns."

"'The WMF is asking [readers in India] for about US $2.00' - the median per capita annual income in India is $616."

"If I thought it had any chance of passing, I would start an RfC on the English Wikipedia to ban all fundraising banners"

"I was certaily under the impression that WP was under financial duress because of the banners."

"I do think the daily dot article raises some fair questions; namely, *why* is the WMF doing all of this?"

"I find Andreas's point about the (unwarranted) urgency implied by the language of fundraising banners very compelling (though I think the US politics tangent is one that's liable to create more heat than light). Another turn of phrase that stuck out to me in a recent banner was "Show the volunteers who bring you reliable, neutral information that their work matters." (example banner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fundraising-Banner-India-2020.jpg). As one of those volunteers who has spent hundreds (thousands?) of hours editing Wikipedia, I was disappointed that WMF would presume to speak for me in this way."

"I have always found the fundraising banners annoying at best and downright pandering and hypocritical at worst."

"It is very sad that even in 2020s there are not many promising open knowledge and free content projects. So please stop criticizing them for raising funds, rather make them focus on solving issues of Wikimedia projects."

"I've long believed that were the WMF to fire half its staff, the average volunteer to any project -- the people who contribute content, not those who regularly interact with the Foundation -- would not notice any difference. [...] I believe it is a significant cause for resentment towards Foundation fundraising. (The aggressive fundraising tactics is, of course, another cause.)"

A contributor to the discussion has pinged you and asked for your comment:

@Lgruwell-WMF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lgruwell-WMF and MeganHernandez (WMF) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MeganHernandez_(WMF): - it's not quite obvious who the fundraising leads are, so please feel free to ping someone who may be more appropriate. If you've got 15 minutes, could you have a read of the interview https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2021-06-27/Forum, and then the discussions/concerns above. As you can see, while many of us don't agree with everything claimed by Kolbe, concerns about the aggressive tone, as well as claims about editors, are common. Your thoughts and participation would be appreciated

I'm not sure how often you log into Wikipedia, so I thought I would notify you here.

Your participation in the discussion would be welcome.

Andreas

[1] https://www.dailydot.com/debug/wikipedia-endownemnt-fundraising/