Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
2009/12/18 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: 2009/12/17 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: I agree with Bod - most people I know will have heard of Craigslist, but I don't know anyone that has used it. We know about it because it is mentioned quite often on TV imported from the US. However, despite everyone having heard of Craigslist, it seems Britons aren't inspired to donate by its founder telling them to. While the Craig Appeal banner was being shown 20% of the time, Wikimedia UK saw a 20% drop in fundraising income compared to the WMF (I look at the ratios of our income to the WMF's, which usually cancels out any changes due to the different banners). There is plenty of variation day to day, but 20% is a bigger change that is usual. Local celebrities for next time. Simon Cowell says: Donate to Wikipedia or I'll put out *two* X-Factor singles for Christmas. I warn you. Eh second choice perhaps. From within the UK we couldn't really miss the chance to ask Sandy Nairne Director of the National Portrait Gallery. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
2009/12/15 Bryan Tong Minh bryan.tongm...@gmail.com: What particularly annoys me, is that the banner invites people to to click on them, but when I click on it I get to the Dutch donation page, which does not answer my question at all Why Craig of Craigslist urges me to support Wikipedia. This is a known problem with the way the geolocation works. I uploaded a patch to bugzilla which would allow chapters to create localised version of landing pages and have banners go directly to them, but, despite the WMF thanking me for it, they have completely ignored it. The UK landing page has a link at the top linking to a page with the statement from Craig, but the same hasn't been done for other chapters. I think the WMF is assuming that most people in countries with chapters taking part in the fundraiser use their local language version of Wikipedia, and this statement is only being shown on the English Wikipedia, so it shouldn't be too much of a problem. I don't know how accurate that assumption is. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
It sounds like some Foundation-l readers are unfamiliar with Craigslist. Here are some news clippings to better familiarize yourself: *http://tinyurl.com/craigslist-in-news *Gregory Kohs* * ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 8:05 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: There is one point left. We can't measure the change in traffic to Craigslist but we can measure this: http://stats.grok.se/en/200912/Craigslist I'm actually not making a point with this link, I just find it interesting: http://stats.grok.se/en/200912/Yizhao%20Lang ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:05 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: There is one point left. We can't measure the change in traffic to Craigslist but we can measure this: http://stats.grok.se/en/200912/Craigslist If you are going to play that game, the one for Craig Newmark is better: http://stats.grok.se/en/200912/Craig%20Newmark -Robert Rohde ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:05 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: There is one point left. We can't measure the change in traffic to Craigslist but we can measure this: http://stats.grok.se/en/200912/Craigslist If you are going to play that game, the one for Craig Newmark is better: http://stats.grok.se/en/200912/Craig%20Newmark To be fair though, you show a message mentioning absolutely anything 40 M times (20% of 200M daily page views) and some people are going to look it up. Frankly I'm suprised the lookup rate isn't higher. -Robert Rohde ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
Overly simplifying, indeed. How did you arrive at the $40 estimate? Are you trying to convert the 15K pageviews in 1 day into a dollar value? Do you think that when people see advertisements on TV, they all immediately flock to websites to look up the product? No, of course not, only a minority of them will, but the web traffic isn't what the advertisers are paying for. It is the message, they are paying to get their name out there in a certain context. This is great publicity for Craigslist and it would be silly to measure the impact by the number of pageviews for our own page on Craigslist. I think the point Geni was trying to make is that it has indeed raised some interest in Craigslist, rather than just helping WMF. Mark On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 11:58 AM, William Pietri will...@scissor.comwrote: Interesting! If I read that right, the Craigslist page on Wikipedia got an extra 15k pageviews or so. As a comparison, my rough guess is that Craigslist gets 100m pageviews/day. I base that on these numbers: http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOrigins.htm http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/craigslist.org+wikipedia.org Assuming the estimate of circa $100m in annual revenues, and making a number of other overly simplifying assumptions, the ballpark financial advantage to Craigslist for Craig Newmark's appearance here is about $40, or 13 seconds worth of revenues. William ___ 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
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
2009/12/17 Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com: This is great publicity for Craigslist and it would be silly to measure the impact by the number of pageviews for our own page on Craigslist. I think the point Geni was trying to make is that it has indeed raised some interest in Craigslist, rather than just helping WMF. This implies it's zero-sum. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com wrote: If we put a quote from Nelson Mandela there, for example, it isn't very likely that he will get any money or website traffic or any quantifiable benefit from our banner. I'm not against the Craig banner but you do raise an interesting point, in that I think we could do better. Who would people's ideal banner person be? I think our aims are noble enough to attract someone truly great. Nelson Mandela would be amazing, wouldn't he? I think we could genuinely aim that high, especially if we can access him via the One Laptop Per Child initiative. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
With regard to whether Craigslist is too parochial, I can give some insight into the UK view. Amongst my online friends (young, 20-40 year old, IT literate, affluent consumers) Craigslist is certainly well known. But entirely unused. I haven't heard of a single person using the site from this country. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Dec 17, 2009, at 1:36 PM, Bod Notbod wrote: Craigslist is certainly well known. But entirely unused. That's fascinating, actually - anthropologically, I'm intrigued at a site that's a household name in that demographic while being unused. Globalization adds interesting twists to all of this, doesn't it? Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategy Project Wikimedia Foundation phili...@wikimedia.org mobile: 918 200-WIKI (9454) Imagine a world in which every human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
2009/12/17 Philippe Beaudette pbeaude...@wikimedia.org: On Dec 17, 2009, at 1:36 PM, Bod Notbod wrote: Craigslist is certainly well known. But entirely unused. That's fascinating, actually - anthropologically, I'm intrigued at a site that's a household name in that demographic while being unused. Globalization adds interesting twists to all of this, doesn't it? I agree with Bod - most people I know will have heard of Craigslist, but I don't know anyone that has used it. We know about it because it is mentioned quite often on TV imported from the US. However, despite everyone having heard of Craigslist, it seems Britons aren't inspired to donate by its founder telling them to. While the Craig Appeal banner was being shown 20% of the time, Wikimedia UK saw a 20% drop in fundraising income compared to the WMF (I look at the ratios of our income to the WMF's, which usually cancels out any changes due to the different banners). There is plenty of variation day to day, but 20% is a bigger change that is usual. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
David Gerard wrote: 2009/12/17 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: I agree with Bod - most people I know will have heard of Craigslist, but I don't know anyone that has used it. We know about it because it is mentioned quite often on TV imported from the US. However, despite everyone having heard of Craigslist, it seems Britons aren't inspired to donate by its founder telling them to. While the Craig Appeal banner was being shown 20% of the time, Wikimedia UK saw a 20% drop in fundraising income compared to the WMF (I look at the ratios of our income to the WMF's, which usually cancels out any changes due to the different banners). There is plenty of variation day to day, but 20% is a bigger change that is usual. Local celebrities for next time. Simon Cowell says: Donate to Wikipedia or I'll put out *two* X-Factor singles for Christmas. I warn you. There has been two X-factor singles. One from the winner, and one from all the finalist earlier for charity. ;-) -- Experience is a good school but the fees are high. - Heinrich Heine PGP.sig Description: PGP signature ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: We've advertised third party for-profits in the past with prominent matched donations notices before (albeit controversially). This isn't that different. As you say, that one was controversial and this one isn't that different. Then it should not surprise you that this one is controversial too, should it? Or do people lose the right to complain against something if it happens the second time? -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: We've advertised third party for-profits in the past with prominent matched donations notices before (albeit controversially). This isn't that different. As you say, that one was controversial and this one isn't that different. Then it should not surprise you that this one is controversial too, should it? Or do people lose the right to complain against something if it happens the second time? -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com At what point is something controversial? As far as I can remember there hasn't been a single decision in the history of Wikimedia that has received universal support. Some people will complain no matter what happens. When you're the person doing the complaining it is your POV that the issue is controversial, whereas when you're the one who isn't complaining then it is your POV that the issue is NOT controversial and the complainers are just overreacting. There is no objective criteria to define controversy. Furthermore, if there is one place in the Wikimedia world where people complain the loudest, longest and for most obscure reasons - it's here on foundatio.nl So, whilst I'm not ignoring the fact that Geni et. al. genuinely feel that this was a bad decision on behalf of the fundraising team, I do not believe that this particular issue warrants the term controversy. It is something that some people dislike but most people are either indifferent to it or see it favourably. Your concerns have been raised, elaborated and debated. I don't think there's anything more that can be said about this particular issue other than to reiterate already voiced points. -Liam [[witty lama]] wittylama.com/blog Peace, love metadata ___ 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
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:35 AM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: We've advertised third party for-profits in the past with prominent matched donations notices before (albeit controversially). This isn't that different. As you say, that one was controversial and this one isn't that different. Then it should not surprise you that this one is controversial too, should it? IIRC, the most controversial part about the Virgin Unite campaign was that I made a stub on the organization using a Single Purpose Account, mispelling the name of the organization, and a bunch of people came up with the conspiracy theory that the short mispelled stub was created by the actual organization (and that somehow there was something wrong with that). But I could be misremembering. What was the Virgin Unite ad like? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
I actually liked the idea of a picture of the man whose making the appeal behind the text (regardless of the fact that Craigslist seemed very US-centric to me, and appreciating the fact that members of the Advisory Board would do such appeals) and I miss it from the Jimmy appeal. (It is an unsubstantiated hypotheses of mine, that probably the donor comments would also have worked with a picture of a real person as a background). Best, Bence Damokos ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
Just as a bit of general background for this thread: The Craig Newmark banner is currently running at 20% on the English Wikipedia. It's a pilot to see how our audience responds to endorsements and testimonials by third parties. (So far, it is doing reasonably well, but not fantastically so; we will likely move on to different messages soon.) We're not running a large endorsement campaign this year, but we wanted to at least get some data on a banner of this type to help us determine whether we want to run more such messages in the future. We approached Craig and asked him whether he would help us with this, and he generously agreed. We chose Craig because he represents, to many people, a philosophy of the web that is comparable to ours. In spite of huge web traffic, Craigslist is run with a staff of 32 and carries no ads, and Craig founded a non-profit organization, the Craigslist Foundation, to support other non-profits. (CraigsList itself is a for-profit.) We're pleased that Craig has joined our Advisory Board, and we're happy he agreed to this endorsement. That said, any kind of personal endorsement can certainly polarize. If, in future, we decide to run more such endorsements, we'll likely want to come up with a rich mix of different kinds of people with very different backgrounds, both to appeal to different segments of our audience, and to get a better understanding of the overall trends. -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
Key phrase for me in this e-mail was CraigsList itself is a for-profit, despite the fact that it was hidden in a parenthetical remark after lots of glowing praise... The Craigslist Foundation is not Craigslist. According to the Wikipedia article on Craigslist: The company does not formally disclose financial or ownership information. Analysts and commentators have reported varying figures for its annual revenue, ranging from $10 million in 2004, $20 million in 2005, and $25 million in 2006 to possibly $150 million in 2007 It is believed to be owned principally by Newmark, Buckmaster, and eBay (the three board members). eBay owns approximately 25%, and Newmark is believed to own the largest stake. We put the name of a for-profit organization flashing across the top of the site... What you said: In spite of huge web traffic, Craigslist is run with a staff of 32 and carries no ads, and Craig founded a non-profit organization, the Craigslist Foundation, to support other non-profits. seems like it is intended to distract the reader from the truth, which is that Craigslist is for profit and owned partly by corporations like eBay. Mark skype: node.ue On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:21 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Just as a bit of general background for this thread: The Craig Newmark banner is currently running at 20% on the English Wikipedia. It's a pilot to see how our audience responds to endorsements and testimonials by third parties. (So far, it is doing reasonably well, but not fantastically so; we will likely move on to different messages soon.) We're not running a large endorsement campaign this year, but we wanted to at least get some data on a banner of this type to help us determine whether we want to run more such messages in the future. We approached Craig and asked him whether he would help us with this, and he generously agreed. We chose Craig because he represents, to many people, a philosophy of the web that is comparable to ours. In spite of huge web traffic, Craigslist is run with a staff of 32 and carries no ads, and Craig founded a non-profit organization, the Craigslist Foundation, to support other non-profits. (CraigsList itself is a for-profit.) We're pleased that Craig has joined our Advisory Board, and we're happy he agreed to this endorsement. That said, any kind of personal endorsement can certainly polarize. If, in future, we decide to run more such endorsements, we'll likely want to come up with a rich mix of different kinds of people with very different backgrounds, both to appeal to different segments of our audience, and to get a better understanding of the overall trends. -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ 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
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
2009/12/15 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org: Just as a bit of general background for this thread: The Craig Newmark banner is currently running at 20% on the English Wikipedia. It's a pilot to see how our audience responds to endorsements and testimonials by third parties. (So far, it is doing reasonably well, but not fantastically so; we will likely move on to different messages soon.) We're not running a large endorsement campaign this year, but we wanted to at least get some data on a banner of this type to help us determine whether we want to run more such messages in the future. We approached Craig and asked him whether he would help us with this, and he generously agreed. We chose Craig because he represents, to many people, a philosophy of the web that is comparable to ours. In spite of huge web traffic, Craigslist is run with a staff of 32 and carries no ads, and Craig founded a non-profit organization, the Craigslist Foundation, to support other non-profits. (CraigsList itself is a for-profit.) We're pleased that Craig has joined our Advisory Board, and we're happy he agreed to this endorsement. That said, any kind of personal endorsement can certainly polarize. I'm aware of Craigslist's PR image there is no need to repeat it. If you wanted to test endorsements there is no shortage of worthies who could provide one without needing an advert for their website appearing on several million page views. Heck if all else failed you could have dug out those UNESCO contacts we've picked up. You are helping Craigslist carry out classic Edward Bernays propaganda/PR and they are not even having to pay you. I mean yes I'm quite impressed that Craigslist managed to pull that one off but there was no need you you to make it so easy for them. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 14:42, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com wrote: The Craig Newmark banner is currently running at 20% on the English Wikipedia. How much known is Craigslist outside of US, in other English speaking countries, or countries where English is used as second/primary language on the web? :) Not at all? grin ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 14:42, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com wrote: The Craig Newmark banner is currently running at 20% on the English Wikipedia. How much known is Craigslist outside of US, in other English speaking countries, or countries where English is used as second/primary language on the web? :) Not at all? grin It's known of in Australia but not that much, For example Gumtree (owned by ebay) is more popular over here. Each country kind of have their own things, some will know of others, but most sites like that aren't really popular in more than one geographical location. -Peachey ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
Personally, I'm glad the Foundation doesn't have the reflexively absolutist anti-capitalist stance that some on this list would like them to have. Happy to see an endorsement from Craig Newmark. Now, if it were Tiger Woods... Nathan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
Is it really anti-capitalist to be against giving Craigslist free publicity? Mark On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I'm glad the Foundation doesn't have the reflexively absolutist anti-capitalist stance that some on this list would like them to have. Happy to see an endorsement from Craig Newmark. Now, if it were Tiger Woods... Nathan ___ 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
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com wrote: It's certainly free publicity for Craigslist, one way or the other. Who says it's free? I assume Mr. Newmark made a significant donation. Maybe that assumption is wrong, though. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
2009/12/15 Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com: If that's true, I am even more against this... what does that say about us? Didn't we have this discussion around Virgin Unite? http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/UnNews:Wikimedia_Foundation_to_introduce_paid_editing Craig Newmark's on the WMF advisory board. Craigslist is already famous. I really think it's pushing us forward, not the other way around. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: I assume Mr. Newmark made a significant donation. Looking at Craig's appeal, now I see what gave me that impression: I'm a proud supporter of Wikipedia, and I encourage you to make a donation to support their work too. Could be just a play on words, but I assume in good faith that he made a monetary donation, and that it wasn't just $50. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
geni wrote: 2009/12/15 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: Craig Newmark's on the WMF advisory board. Craigslist is already famous. I really think it's pushing us forward, not the other way around. Craig Newmark has around 300K google results. Jimbo is at half a million. Craigslist is at about 65 million wikipedia is at about 300 million. For groups that almost entirely exist online that's a fair solid way of showing which is more significant. In terms of using fame to push us forwards about the only web company owners who might be able to do that would be Mark Zuckerberg and google's co-founders. That's a strangely limited notion of who has the capability to help - only people who are quantitatively more famous than us? For a project that's built around lots and lots of individual contributions (whether we're talking content, finances, or publicity), none of them especially huge in the overall scheme of things, it seems completely backwards to suggest that such things are useless if they don't dwarf what has already been achieved. --Michael Snow ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:47 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: Craig Newmark has around 300K google results. Jimbo is at half a million. Yizhao Lang has about 1,000. But I guess you didn't mention the company he works for. The horror. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
2009/12/15 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net: That's a strangely limited notion of who has the capability to help - only people who are quantitatively more famous than us? For a project that's built around lots and lots of individual contributions (whether we're talking content, finances, or publicity), none of them especially huge in the overall scheme of things, it seems completely backwards to suggest that such things are useless if they don't dwarf what has already been achieved. The argument was that it was his fame that was helpful and that it rose to the level that we should overlook the obvious problem. If you wish to take my comments out of that context I can't stop you but you are attacking a strawman. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
2009/12/15 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org: On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:47 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: Craig Newmark has around 300K google results. Jimbo is at half a million. Yizhao Lang has about 1,000. But I guess you didn't mention the company he works for. The horror. With Yizhao Lang it was what they were saying rather than the person who said it that was significant. In addition there is no evidence that when Yizhao Lang made the comment in question he knew it was featured so prominently. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
We've advertised third party for-profits in the past with prominent matched donations notices before (albeit controversially). This isn't that different. Craigslist gets some publicity and we get some money (hopefully - it's more definite in the matched donations case, of course). I don't see a problem. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:58 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/12/15 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org: On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:47 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: Craig Newmark has around 300K google results. Jimbo is at half a million. Yizhao Lang has about 1,000. But I guess you didn't mention the company he works for. The horror. With Yizhao Lang it was what they were saying rather than the person who said it that was significant. In addition there is no evidence that when Yizhao Lang made the comment in question he knew it was featured so prominently. Yes, it's different. But as long as this was done in the best interest of the Wikimedia Foundation (and no one has presented any evidence it hasn't), I still don't see the problem. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 16:47, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
Craig Newmark has around 300K google results. Jimbo is at half a
million. Craigslist is at about 65 million wikipedia is at about 300
million. For groups that almost entirely exist online that's a fair
solid way of showing which is more significant. In terms of using fame
to push us forwards about the only web company owners who might be
able to do that would be Mark Zuckerberg and google's co-founders.
And no they wouldn't be a good idea either.
Craigslist has some PR problems at the moment what with all the scams
and the various law enforcement agencies objecting to some of their
personal ads. Associating with a project with some of the most
titanium hardened community driven altruism credentials on the web is
a valid strategy for trying to return to the image they like to
maintain.
Just so I understand your argument. Were Jimmy Wales to lend his name
and good will to support a cause {insert here name of noble cause you
believe in}, I suppose you would summarize his help as oh, he's
trying to get his company to get a better image? Wait, I'm probably
starting a troll here. Replace Jimmy Wales with whatever known
person you can think of.
Did it ever occur to you that real people _aren't_ the company they
founded/bought/are taking care of?
And whether it is Craig Newmark, the Dalai Lama, the Pope or my
neighbours, if their supporting a good cause actually works and
money comes in and awareness rises, frankly, I say go ahead and
thanks for all your help.
Geez,
Delphine
--
~notafish
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will
get lost.
Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
2009/12/15 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com:
Just so I understand your argument. Were Jimmy Wales to lend his name
and good will to support a cause {insert here name of noble cause you
believe in}, I suppose you would summarize his help as oh, he's
trying to get his company to get a better image? Wait, I'm probably
starting a troll here. Replace Jimmy Wales with whatever known
person you can think of.
Did it ever occur to you that real people _aren't_ the company they
founded/bought/are taking care of?
The text of the advert:
Craig of Craigslist urges you to support Wikipedia. Why?
In that context the separation between person and company is rather weak.
And whether it is Craig Newmark, the Dalai Lama, the Pope or my
neighbours, if their supporting a good cause actually works and
money comes in and awareness rises, frankly, I say go ahead and
thanks for all your help.
So you are okey with adverts on wikipedia as long as they are ah
supporting a good cause? Third parties supporting wikipedia is one
thing. At the cost of advertsing their company on one in five page
views of wikipedia? No that is quite another.
--
geni
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:55 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/12/15 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com: And whether it is Craig Newmark, the Dalai Lama, the Pope or my neighbours, if their supporting a good cause actually works and money comes in and awareness rises, frankly, I say go ahead and thanks for all your help. So you are okey with adverts on wikipedia as long as they are ah supporting a good cause? Personally, I am. Especially if they fall under the category of qualified sponsorship payments ( http://www.irs.gov/publications/p598/ch03.html#en_US_publink100067505) with regard to the IRS. (For liability reasons I am not making nor will I make any judgment as to whether or not this particular ad does qualify as such.) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Dec 15, 2009, at 11:55 AM, geni wrote: So you are okey with adverts on wikipedia as long as they are ah supporting a good cause? Noun advertisement (plural advertisements) (marketing) A commercial solicitation designed to sell some commodity, service or similar. I really don't see how a banner asking someone to give US money is an advertisement, Geni. Philippe Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategy Project Wikimedia Foundation phili...@wikimedia.org mobile: 918 200-WIKI (9454) Imagine a world in which every human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
geni wrote: 2009/12/15 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net: That's a strangely limited notion of who has the capability to help - only people who are quantitatively more famous than us? For a project that's built around lots and lots of individual contributions (whether we're talking content, finances, or publicity), none of them especially huge in the overall scheme of things, it seems completely backwards to suggest that such things are useless if they don't dwarf what has already been achieved. The argument was that it was his fame that was helpful and that it rose to the level that we should overlook the obvious problem. If you wish to take my comments out of that context I can't stop you but you are attacking a strawman. I don't see why it would be out of context, or attacking a straw man, to challenge this understanding of what fame entails, or how much is needed for it to be helpful. As it's been said about this interconnected age, most of us end up being famous for perhaps 15 people, and sometimes to a wider audience for 15 minutes. Clearly less than the overall fame of Wikipedia, yet when it comes to endorsements or testimonials, that has been a big part of achieving it, something marketers would call word-of-mouth or buzz. Fame is highly context-dependent, so both the magnitude and the usefulness vary with the circumstances. (That's part of the reason to test different fundraising approaches against each other.) The importance of context, and the existence of multiple contexts, also undermines the second half of the premise (whether it's yours or you're arguing against it, it's the wrong argument to have). It assumes this has a binary and zero-sum nature, and ignores the clear disagreement about whether there's a problem in the first place, let alone whether anything here is obvious enough to overlook. Yes, different kinds of fame interacting in a public setting will affect all the parties, it's a fundamental aspect of how society works. There will always be side effects and unintended consequences, because public attention is not something we can contain or control. Attempting to reduce it to an economic transaction is a very limited understanding of the dynamic, even if entire sectors of the web devote themselves to just that. --Michael Snow ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
If I were a rich and famous person that wanted to help out the WMF I would get shitscared by this list and wouldn't touch the foundation with a 10 foot pole W ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
Domas Mituzas midom.li...@... writes: Erik, The Craig Newmark banner is currently running at 20% on the English Wikipedia. How much known is Craigslist outside of US, in other English speaking countries, or countries where English is used as second/primary language on the web? :) I for one have never heart of Craigslist before and I don't think I have heart anybody talking about it before in real life. What particularly annoys me, is that the banner invites people to to click on them, but when I click on it I get to the Dutch donation page, which does not answer my question at all Why Craig of Craigslist urges me to support Wikipedia. Bryan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
Can we kill this thread? It appears quite clear that the Foundation staff have decided to run the Craig ad, and nothing here will affect their decision. From: Waerth wae...@asianet.co.th To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tue, December 15, 2009 11:02:54 AM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist If I were a rich and famous person that wanted to help out the WMF I would get shitscared by this list and wouldn't touch the foundation with a 10 foot pole W ___ 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
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net wrote: geni wrote: 2009/12/15 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net: That's a strangely limited notion of who has the capability to help - only people who are quantitatively more famous than us? For a project that's built around lots and lots of individual contributions (whether we're talking content, finances, or publicity), none of them especially huge in the overall scheme of things, it seems completely backwards to suggest that such things are useless if they don't dwarf what has already been achieved. The argument was that it was his fame that was helpful and that it rose to the level that we should overlook the obvious problem. If you wish to take my comments out of that context I can't stop you but you are attacking a strawman. I don't see why it would be out of context, or attacking a straw man, to challenge this understanding of what fame entails, or how much is needed for it to be helpful. As it's been said about this interconnected age, most of us end up being famous for perhaps 15 people, and sometimes to a wider audience for 15 minutes. Clearly less than the overall fame of Wikipedia, yet when it comes to endorsements or testimonials, that has been a big part of achieving it, something marketers would call word-of-mouth or buzz. Fame is highly context-dependent, so both the magnitude and the usefulness vary with the circumstances. (That's part of the reason to test different fundraising approaches against each other.) Indeed; and arguably Craig Newmark is much, much more famous in San Francisco (where he's a local celeb) than he would be pretty much anywhere else. That might be part of the issue here. If you know who he is in the SF-tech-community-philanthropy context, it might strike you as more of a clear use of his good name to generously support a cool project. If you don't, it might look like more of a clear advertisement for Craigslist. Regardless this is basically the same debate we had over Virgin Unite -- the name of any commercial organization (and probably any other nonprofit organization, too, if we're honest with ourselves) being displayed on the site provokes intense dislike and debate among a large section of the community -- for various reasons, but mostly summarized as we don't want to use the resources of Wikipedia to advocate or advertise for another organization. -- phoebe -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 23:00, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed; and arguably Craig Newmark is much, much more famous in San Francisco (where he's a local celeb) than he would be pretty much anywhere else. That might be part of the issue here. If you know who he is in the SF-tech-community-philanthropy context, it might strike you as more of a clear use of his good name to generously support a cool project. If you don't, it might look like more of a clear advertisement for Craigslist. Yes, that would be my main criticism about this all. Not that I think it's advertising, but I think Greg mentionned it earlier in the thread, rather that Craigslist has probably an audience that (apart from being centered in the US, SF etc.) has a lot in common to our contributing community. ie. people who already have desactivated the site notice long ago ;) Regardless this is basically the same debate we had over Virgin Unite -- the name of any commercial organization (and probably any other nonprofit organization, too, if we're honest with ourselves) being displayed on the site provokes intense dislike and debate among a large section of the community -- for various reasons, but mostly summarized as we don't want to use the resources of Wikipedia to advocate or advertise for another organization. Sooo true. Parochialists, are we? :D Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On 12/15/2009 11:20 AM, Bryan Tong Minh wrote: I for one have never heart of Craigslist before and I don't think I have heart anybody talking about it before in real life. This may be a regional thing. According to Alexa, Craiglist is the 11th most popular US web site, while Wikipedia is 7th. Compete.com's numbers, which I think are pretty US-centric, show Craigslist with 50m monthly users. It has also been popular for a relatively long time, predating Wikipedia by a number of years. Like Wikipedia, it gets a fair bit of media coverage not just for what it is, but because it has a lot of interest for journalists; Craiglist is frequently mentioned as major cause of declining US newspaper revenues because it destroyed much of the classified ads market. William ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
I see we have taken to advertising craigslist. Would anyone care to explain why? -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
Geni's referring to a fundraiser sitenotice with a picture of Craig Newmark, and the text Craig of Craigslist urges you to support Wikipedia. Why? On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: care to give some context to your question? [[witty lama]] wittylama.com/blog Peace, love metadata On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:50 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: I see we have taken to advertising craigslist. Would anyone care to explain why? -- geni ___ 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 -- [[User:Ral315]] ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
Geni is speaking of the huge banner on Enwp at the moment featuring Craig of craigslist. Hit reload a few times if you haven't seen it. It links to a clearly spoken statement of support for wikipedia. To avoid you haivng to click and goofing up the counters, here is what it says: I'm a proud supporter of Wikipedia, and I encourage you to make a donation to support their work too. Wikipedia is an accomplishment of major proportions. It's become the first draft of history, a vital, living repository of human knowledge. How did we ever manage without it? Wikipedia makes it easy to learn about anything. It's dramatic proof of the supreme effectiveness of collaboration: people from all around the world work together on Wikipedia to build articles with one purpose - to provide free knowledge. But the work has just begun. And Wikipedia needs our financial support. If you read it, if you edit it, if you visit it more than once a month: please join me in supporting Wikipedia today. There is are no hyperlinks to anything but WMF donation stuff, from the target. On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:50 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: I see we have taken to advertising craigslist. Would anyone care to explain why? Your post makes me sad: I think the banner is doing the right thing and if we complain about moderate and well considered actions then we lose credibility when something more foolish is done. I normally respect and appreciate your comments but I this one is not a fair one. The banner isn't a link to craiglist, it's 'The founder of this other widely known (and I think usually well respected) organization endorses wikipedia, here is why...' Arguably craiglist is only known and credible to much of the same subculture that WMF's message has already reached— I suppose the results will have to be left to speak for themselves— but is this an add for craigslist? Hardly. It's a craig-of-craigslist ad for Wikipedia, speaking about the virtues of Wikipedia, not craig or craigs-list (other than the virtue of his support, which is being used as social proof). I accept that there can be a reasonable discussion about the wisdom of this kind of messaging, but I don't think that such a discussion could be had with your rather extreme characterization overhanging. Might I convince you to restate it in a way more conducive of discussion than dispute? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
The banner can be seen at: http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:NoticeTemplate/viewtemplate=2009_Craig_Appeal1 -Robert Rohde On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: care to give some context to your question? [[witty lama]] wittylama.com/blog Peace, love metadata On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:50 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: I see we have taken to advertising craigslist. Would anyone care to explain why? -- geni ___ 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
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
It's certainly free publicity for Craigslist, one way or the other. Anybody who does not know what Craigslist is now will see it every time they see the banner, may google it or look it up on WP to find out what it is, and start using it. Any time we put the name of any kind of person or organization there, that is free publicity so I think it is imperative that we think about what effect that publicity will have in the end. If we put a quote from Nelson Mandela there, for example, it isn't very likely that he will get any money or website traffic or any quantifiable benefit from our banner. If we put an impassioned plea from The CEO of Webbooks.com, it is very possible that will result in additional traffic and exposure for that website. Although the banner is not intended as an ad, I must admit that when I saw it I instantly disliked it. If it were up to me, it would not be there. I can certainly understand the reasons for keeping it up and I also don't think this is a terrible situation or anything so I won't argue about this but I wanted to make it known that Geni isn't the only one of the opinion that it's not a good thing. Mark skype: node.ue On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Philippe Beaudette pbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Dec 14, 2009, at 9:50 PM, geni wrote: I see we have taken to advertising craigslist. Would anyone care to explain why? I fail to understand how acknowledging the existence of a company founded by an advisory board member who kindly consents to begging for money on our behalf constitutes advertising for it? Would the banner have been as effective if it had said Craig asks you to support...? Geez. Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategy Project Wikimedia Foundation phili...@wikimedia.org mobile: 918 200-WIKI (9454) Imagine a world in which every human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ 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
