[Foundation-l] fundraiser suggestion

[Joe Corneli]

I liked the idea of clearly indicating what the current amount of
funds would go for and what the next major funding milestones are.
(Sorry, whoever it was who posted this initially as an alternative to
things becoming "urgent" - I'd cite your post but I didn't find it
upon looking again!)

The thing is, that might not work to bring in the bucks the same way
"urgent" does.

Maybe in light of the comment about Pareto: there are going to be a
few people who can contribute a lot (including non-monetary
contributions) and many who can contribute a little (again, including
both monetary and non-monetary contributions).

Those who want to contribute "a lot" in terms of hands-on involvement,
volunteer hours, and so forth, would probably be very well served by
clear links to the "thermometer" or a clear indication of project and
fundraising milestones.  Those who just want to contribute X amount of
money because it makes them feel good have no need for that stuff.

Obviously we're talking about *fund*raising here, but it's still a
good time to look for ways to increase non-monetary contributions,
possibly including connecting with those users who would prefer a
"co-op" model to a "charity" model.

On 1/2/11, Mono mium <monomium at gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps you should work on establishing the Wikimedia brand...
>
> On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>> 2011/1/1 Stephen Bain <stephen.bain at gmail.com>:
>> > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> But to suggest that the choice of such
>> >> shorthand is tantamount to "lying to and misleading our donors" is,
>> >> indeed, irresponsible hyperbole. It's clear that the choice was, in
>> >> fact, made to _reduce_ potential confusion of donors about who/what
>> >> they're being asked to support.
>> >
>> > Hang on:
>> >
>> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Philippe Beaudette
>> > <pbeaudette at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> When we get letters saying things like "I'd donate, but only to
>> Wikipedia, not to Wikimedia", it spells out for us that it's possible we
>> could attract more people with the institution of Wikipedia than the
>> institution of Wikimedia.
>>
>> See the immediately previous sentence in Philippe's email: "Yes, it'll
>> come as a shock to all of you <tongue-in-cheek> but there are people
>> who don't know that Wikimedia is anything more than a mis-spelling of
>> Wikipedia. </tongue-in-cheek>." He's talking about the exact same
>> issue.
>>
>> --
>> Erik Möller
>> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
>>
>> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>