After all, a person probably isn't going to donate ten times just because ten different people appealed for funds.
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Peter Coombe <thewub.w...@googlemail.com>wrote: > I believe that the plan is to bring in the "thermometer" showing how > close we are to our target in the later stages of the fundraiser. As > you say, hopefully that will boost donations again. > > At the moment we seem to be doing fine. The personal appeal has proved > itself extremely powerful, I think the only reason the Jimbo appeal > came so late last year was that no one realised just how effective it > could be. It's only natural that response will decrease over time, so > that's why there are a variety of messages being trialled to keep up > interest. > > Pete / the wub > > > On 7 December 2010 15:00, Olaf Simons <olaf.sim...@pierre-marteau.com> > wrote: > > One of the problems is probably the rhythm of the fundraiser. Jimbo > stepped in > > as he would normally do several weeks later. One would till then see the > bar > > running up to the number WMF was trying to reach - and may be decide to > actually > > make WMF reach its target. > > > > The present campaign is extremely personalised and it has cancelled the > "what we > > need / and what we have" question. The reactions on the present campaign > are as > > personal reaching from satire to the odd individual (as now seen) trying > to > > bring his own person into the game. > > > > Olaf > > > > _______________________________________________ > > foundation-l mailing list > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l