[Foundation-l] Blink tag jokes are now obsolete.

[Peter Coombe]

On 11 January 2012 04:48, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>
>> This is not a criticism of WM-DE: We used that language last year, and
>> I felt much of the criticism of it was unreasonable, especially yours.
>> I find it interesting, though, in the context of the discussion that's
>> happening on Meta right now regarding funds dissemination. It is also
>> worth noting that we didn't use either choice of words this year in
>> the WMF campaign in response to the concerns from last year.
>
>> From the standpoint of creating a balanced, community-friendly
>> campaign that's respectful and responsive, decentralizing
>> decision-making about the shape of the campaign to the geographic
>> level is IMO likely to do the opposite: It will create more pressure
>> (because it's a more competitive environment) between fundraising
>> entities to maximize revenue and push the limits, while reducing
>> visibility of (and associated accountability for) specific choices
>> like the above among the wider Wikimedia community.
>>
>
> Yes, very symptomatic of the organiosational malaise. Folks up on
> high just not giving up on the idea that they know best, and trying to
> finagle a way to make their way against a very solid community view.
>
> To be perfectly honest we need to set red lines for the foundation,
> beyond which the community will not follow,but will fork, with the
> full force of the intent. Learn to listen, foundation, don't try to sell
> things. You aren't put into your positions to sell things to the
> community. You are their servants. Get it?
>

I'm confused. Erik just pointed out an example (the use of "urgent" in
the fundraising banners) where the Foundation changed its actions
explicitly based on concerns expressed by the community. So I'm not
sure how it follows as "Folks up on high just not giving up on the
idea that they know best"

Conversely the fader banners were highly effective and prompted few if
any complaints in 2010, so it seemed reasonable to use them again. I'm
sure the concerns raised this time around will be taken into
consideration for next year.

Pete / the wub