Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

I like it. Gets right to the point. However, the wording is weasely: e.g.- "averaging about $15". I would vote to have it say "$18" and omit the redunantly redundant weasely "averaging about", then put a button for $1.50, recurring monthly. That will hit the $18. I am not sure why y'alls say

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 3:35 AM, geni wrote: > On 14 November 2017 at 22:12, Samuel Patton wrote: > > If you have thoughts on this design, please share them here. There will > be > > more opportunities for you to weigh in if this banner variant looks >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

Hi, On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Samuel Patton wrote: >- Petr Kadlec, this work-in-progress banner is using some copy written >in English, as well as a couple translation templates; the final version >will all be hardcoded English. However, your bug

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

On 14 November 2017 at 22:12, Samuel Patton wrote: > If you have thoughts on this design, please share them here. There will be > more opportunities for you to weigh in if this banner variant looks > promising enough to keep testing. > > Regards and sincere thanks for all

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

I want to thank everyone for this robust discussion! We appreciate the feedback very much. I want to recognize the role that Joseph Seddon has played in encouraging us to share more results with this email list; he's the #1 reason that I started this thread. I also want to thank Peter Coombe, my

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

What kind of reasonably new device has that kind of resolution? On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 12:41 PM, wrote: > Patrik, try it on a 640x480 screen. :P > > On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 16:06 pajz wrote: > > > > > > > This test would run for 1 to 2 hours, and then we'd

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

Patrik, try it on a 640x480 screen. :P On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 16:06 pajz wrote: > > > > This test would run for 1 to 2 hours, and then we'd evaluate results to > see > > if it's worth spending any more time on the concept. For now, we're > simply > > hiding the banner all

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

Hi, On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:12 PM, Samuel Patton wrote: > If you have thoughts on this design, please share them here. There will be > more opportunities for you to weigh in if this banner variant looks > promising enough to keep testing. > A slightly different

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

> > This test would run for 1 to 2 hours, and then we'd evaluate results to see > if it's worth spending any more time on the concept. For now, we're simply > hiding the banner all together below 920px, as at smaller viewports it > begins to interfere with site navigation elements. It is truly

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

Well, I'm not skilled in marketing, but maybe being ugly and annoyingly large is part of the "pay attention" driving force. Regarding the format, as said I'm not sikilled in the domain, so my opinion surely doesn't worth much. The good old vertical banner is definitely simpler, so it might be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

both are equally ugly, they should much more smaller, current banner should 1/10 or 1/8th of a page not half of it. Mardetanha On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > Hello, > I like it too, actually better than the earlier one. Looks good on the > tablet;

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

Hello, I like it too, actually better than the earlier one. Looks good on the tablet; can be clicked away (the X seems to be a little fable). Kind regards, Ziko Peter Southwood schrieb am Mi. 15. Nov. 2017 um 08:16: > The sidebar version is less offensive than the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

The sidebar version is less offensive than the top banner on my widescreen desktop. The message and text sizing is also better in the sidebar version Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Samuel Patton Sent:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

I like it! as it doesn't cover up the article I came to read. Contrary to Liam, it worked well for me in Linux/Firefox and Linux/Chrome. Regards, Richard. On 15 November 2017 at 09:12, Samuel Patton wrote: > Hi all, it's Sam from the online fundraising team. I wanted to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

Sam, Thanks for the heads up! Is there any measure of the negative impact of a banner (in distraction, self-reported annoyance, abandoned sessions), separate from its fundraising impact? I imagine some very noticeable banners will have high positives as well as negatives; then the question would

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

Hi Samuel, thanks for being circumspect about the new banner design! On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Samuel Patton wrote: > If you have thoughts on this design, please share them here. There will be > more opportunities for you to weigh in if this banner variant looks >