Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[Dan Garry]

On 8 Dec 2016 3:50 p.m., "Comet styles"  wrote:

Spamming to ask for donations so that they don't spam again until
December 2017 (Y)


There's plenty of room for constructive criticism, but this is not it. Your
weaken your point by resorting to attacks. Please be more constructive in
your posts.

Dan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[Comet styles]

Spamming to ask for donations so that they don't spam again until
December 2017 (Y)

On 12/2/16, Pine W  wrote:
> OK, thanks for the info. I'll be interested to read a summary of the
> campaign when WMF is in a position to create one, which I'm guessing might
> be in January or February.
>
> I could ask more questions, but I think that I'd better retreat back into
> my digital cave. I have a UI project calling my name!
>
> Thanks for the rapid responses to questions and comments.
>
> Pine
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:53 PM, Joseph Seddon  wrote:
>
>> More than it represents a feasible concept that can be significantly
>> improved upon. Reducing it's footprint, improving the look and feel so
>> that
>> it reduces its impact on the page.
>>
>> With regards to user appeals with photos:
>> 1) They are notoriously difficult to be successful. We spent a whole year
>> trying to beat Jimmy's face and Brandon was the only one who ever came
>> close.
>> 2) our banners follow closely trends on the wider web. Donor preferences
>> at
>> the moment seem to follow an image-lite experience. We tried last year
>> reintroducing info graphics or pictures only to remove them again. Its an
>> area we regularly reassess to see if our readers tastes have changed.
>>
>> Seddon
>>
>> On 2 Dec 2016 06:17, "Pine W"  wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Seddon,
>> >
>> > By "And in this instance although the test was successful, we had
>> > decided
>> > that
>> > although a winner, it was the lessons to take away that were more
>> > important. From there we hope to arrive at a banner that draws from the
>> > success but is delivered in a way that is easier on the eye." are you
>> > saying that
>> > you've decided to discontinue the inline fundraising but will use
>> > lessons
>> > learned
>> > from it to design banners?
>> >
>> > By the way, I thought that some of the WMF folks on Facebook had a good
>> > idea when they suggested the "I <3 Wikipedia" frames on peoples' profile
>> > pictures. That brings to mind that in a previous round of fundraising
>> that
>> > WMF
>> > had banners with Wikimedians' photos and some fundraising messages that
>> > I
>> > believe were written by them. Perhaps you could consider bringing back
>> > a version of that campaign.
>> >
>> > I believe that there is some tradeoff in the length of the campaign and
>> the
>> > boldness of the fundraising, so to a certain extent I'm reluctantly
>> willing
>> > to accept bold fundraising if that means that the campaign ends sooner.
>> >
>> > I feel strongly that the campaign should stick to 100% of its stated
>> > target,
>> > not intentionally overshoot the target for purposes of padding the
>> > reserves. When WMF says that its goal is $X, then it should end the
>> > campaign when it has high certainty that it has reached $X. If that
>> > means
>> > that a campaign ends a week early, so much the better.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Pine
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > 
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 


-- 
Cometstyles

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[Pine W]

OK, thanks for the info. I'll be interested to read a summary of the
campaign when WMF is in a position to create one, which I'm guessing might
be in January or February.

I could ask more questions, but I think that I'd better retreat back into
my digital cave. I have a UI project calling my name!

Thanks for the rapid responses to questions and comments.

Pine


On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:53 PM, Joseph Seddon  wrote:

> More than it represents a feasible concept that can be significantly
> improved upon. Reducing it's footprint, improving the look and feel so that
> it reduces its impact on the page.
>
> With regards to user appeals with photos:
> 1) They are notoriously difficult to be successful. We spent a whole year
> trying to beat Jimmy's face and Brandon was the only one who ever came
> close.
> 2) our banners follow closely trends on the wider web. Donor preferences at
> the moment seem to follow an image-lite experience. We tried last year
> reintroducing info graphics or pictures only to remove them again. Its an
> area we regularly reassess to see if our readers tastes have changed.
>
> Seddon
>
> On 2 Dec 2016 06:17, "Pine W"  wrote:
>
> > Hi Seddon,
> >
> > By "And in this instance although the test was successful, we had decided
> > that
> > although a winner, it was the lessons to take away that were more
> > important. From there we hope to arrive at a banner that draws from the
> > success but is delivered in a way that is easier on the eye." are you
> > saying that
> > you've decided to discontinue the inline fundraising but will use lessons
> > learned
> > from it to design banners?
> >
> > By the way, I thought that some of the WMF folks on Facebook had a good
> > idea when they suggested the "I <3 Wikipedia" frames on peoples' profile
> > pictures. That brings to mind that in a previous round of fundraising
> that
> > WMF
> > had banners with Wikimedians' photos and some fundraising messages that I
> > believe were written by them. Perhaps you could consider bringing back
> > a version of that campaign.
> >
> > I believe that there is some tradeoff in the length of the campaign and
> the
> > boldness of the fundraising, so to a certain extent I'm reluctantly
> willing
> > to accept bold fundraising if that means that the campaign ends sooner.
> >
> > I feel strongly that the campaign should stick to 100% of its stated
> > target,
> > not intentionally overshoot the target for purposes of padding the
> > reserves. When WMF says that its goal is $X, then it should end the
> > campaign when it has high certainty that it has reached $X. If that means
> > that a campaign ends a week early, so much the better.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Pine
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[Joseph Seddon]

More than it represents a feasible concept that can be significantly
improved upon. Reducing it's footprint, improving the look and feel so that
it reduces its impact on the page.

With regards to user appeals with photos:
1) They are notoriously difficult to be successful. We spent a whole year
trying to beat Jimmy's face and Brandon was the only one who ever came
close.
2) our banners follow closely trends on the wider web. Donor preferences at
the moment seem to follow an image-lite experience. We tried last year
reintroducing info graphics or pictures only to remove them again. Its an
area we regularly reassess to see if our readers tastes have changed.

Seddon

On 2 Dec 2016 06:17, "Pine W"  wrote:

> Hi Seddon,
>
> By "And in this instance although the test was successful, we had decided
> that
> although a winner, it was the lessons to take away that were more
> important. From there we hope to arrive at a banner that draws from the
> success but is delivered in a way that is easier on the eye." are you
> saying that
> you've decided to discontinue the inline fundraising but will use lessons
> learned
> from it to design banners?
>
> By the way, I thought that some of the WMF folks on Facebook had a good
> idea when they suggested the "I <3 Wikipedia" frames on peoples' profile
> pictures. That brings to mind that in a previous round of fundraising that
> WMF
> had banners with Wikimedians' photos and some fundraising messages that I
> believe were written by them. Perhaps you could consider bringing back
> a version of that campaign.
>
> I believe that there is some tradeoff in the length of the campaign and the
> boldness of the fundraising, so to a certain extent I'm reluctantly willing
> to accept bold fundraising if that means that the campaign ends sooner.
>
> I feel strongly that the campaign should stick to 100% of its stated
> target,
> not intentionally overshoot the target for purposes of padding the
> reserves. When WMF says that its goal is $X, then it should end the
> campaign when it has high certainty that it has reached $X. If that means
> that a campaign ends a week early, so much the better.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[Pine W]

Hi Seddon,

By "And in this instance although the test was successful, we had decided
that
although a winner, it was the lessons to take away that were more
important. From there we hope to arrive at a banner that draws from the
success but is delivered in a way that is easier on the eye." are you
saying that
you've decided to discontinue the inline fundraising but will use lessons
learned
from it to design banners?

By the way, I thought that some of the WMF folks on Facebook had a good
idea when they suggested the "I <3 Wikipedia" frames on peoples' profile
pictures. That brings to mind that in a previous round of fundraising that
WMF
had banners with Wikimedians' photos and some fundraising messages that I
believe were written by them. Perhaps you could consider bringing back
a version of that campaign.

I believe that there is some tradeoff in the length of the campaign and the
boldness of the fundraising, so to a certain extent I'm reluctantly willing
to accept bold fundraising if that means that the campaign ends sooner.

I feel strongly that the campaign should stick to 100% of its stated
target,
not intentionally overshoot the target for purposes of padding the
reserves. When WMF says that its goal is $X, then it should end the
campaign when it has high certainty that it has reached $X. If that means
that a campaign ends a week early, so much the better.

Thanks,

Pine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[Joseph Seddon]

So for a stub article the original banner was a little overbearing in
relation to the content but a substantial part of that was related to that
banners particular dynamics that we weren't too fond of ourselves and
looking to improve.

Seddon

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:

> Personally I think the inline banners are invasive to the content, unlike
> side bar or top of page banners which dont interfere with the delivery of
> content, the page layout or potentially imply association with the topic. I
> also recognise that mobile presentation is already degraded to suit the
> device so its aesthetics impact would be lower on that medium compared
> desktop services.
>
> As I havent encounted one besides the screen shot and samples I cant
> comment on the practical aspects of impact on a stub article over that of a
> featured article nor how it relates to the subject topic.
>
> On 2 December 2016 at 10:17, Pine W  wrote:
>
> > I've been thinking about these inline ads since I first encountered one,
> > which I believe was either yesterday or today. I'm uncomfortable with the
> > idea of inline ads, but they seem to be clearly delineated from article
> > content, and as far as I can tell there is simply no easy way to do
> on-wiki
> > fundraising without a certain amount of distraction to the reader. I
> don't
> > like this practice, but it's hard for me to say that I dislike it any
> more
> > than massive banners. Until WMF has such a large endowment that it no
> > longer needs to do online fundraising (which would create a different set
> > of financial accountability problems than we have now; maybe or maybe not
> > more or less, but different) I'm reluctantly willing to go along with the
> > program. If people have some convincing reasons why inline fundraising
> > should not happen, I hope that they will speak up. At the moment I think
> > it's OK to go with the flow.
> >
> > In the future I would suggest that this kind of change should be
> > communicated ahead of time, on this mailing list and elsewhere. (Unless I
> > missed it, which would be my fault.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Pine
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey Geni,
> > >
> > > So this is a style of banner that we have used on mobile over the last
> > > year. We have previously had good feedback about the mobile version
> with
> > > people feeling it was less obtrusive to the reader experience. This
> > banner
> > > that you saw was one of our first attempts at seeing whether
> transferring
> > > this to desktop was even a viable idea.
> > >
> > > That test showed this design had a huge amount of potential from a
> > > fundraising point of view, between a 60% & 90% increase in donations.
> > > However we felt that the banner wasn't quite providing the same
> > experience
> > > as we were getting on mobile. The size was larger and so we think that
> we
> > > can refine the concept so that it remains effective but making it less
> > > intrusive both than it’s current form and our current control banner (
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1617_
> > > 1117_en6C_dsk_p2_sm_template&force=1&country=US).
> > > We are working a number of smaller versions that are a little more in
> > > keeping with the experience provided on mobile, so keep in mind this is
> > far
> > > from a finished version.
> > >
> > > I would like to emphasis that we are not committed to this. It's
> > certainly
> > > a change from what we have had in the past and, based on that, both I
> and
> > > my colleagues would genuinely like to hear people's views on this type
> of
> > > banner. For now this banner will be limited to testing and our current
> > > small banner (
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1617_
> > > 1117_en6C_dsk_p2_sm_template&force=1&country=US)
> > > will be remaining our control. We would like to do a few more tests
> with
> > an
> > > improved take on this style and I would be happy to share the outcomes
> of
> > > those if it would help inform the discussion.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Seddon
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:56 PM, geni  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Screenshot of what I mean:
> > > >
> > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Inline_donor_bannerbass.png
> > > >
> > > > Inline ads are generally considered to be something that gets into
> > > > scummy advertising territory (for example even adblock plus's rather
> > > > questionable Acceptable Ad policy doesn't accept them).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On a related note the FAQ appears to be out of date:
> > > >
> > > > https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en
> > > >
> > > > Unless we are still in the 2015-2016 fiscal year.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > geni
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[Joseph Seddon]

Hey Pine,

Communicating about testing is something we need to work out how to
improve. One of the issues is the sheer volume of content we are dealing
with. During these early days our banner team is running about 7 tests a
day, and we have already tested 66 banners and counting. That doesn't
include all of the prototype work in design process and since tuesday
nearly 200 banners have been created.

Some ideas are ones that you've been sitting on saving up for big english,
others are ones you dig out of the closet based on new information, then
there are tests that are done on the fly in reaction to the recent results
that take your course in a whole different trajectory and many (often the
unexpected successes and often the bolder choices) are the ones that that
are spur of the moment.

To be fair this was more in the second category. We tried it once earlier
in the year and we suspected it was something we would revisit. In this
instance we probably could have flagged it up sooner. But running such test
is still valuable information, it allows for an informed discussion. It
should be noted that the fundraising team isn't directly purely by
fundraising success rates. Through the design process we filter out many of
the more... shall we say... bolder banners. Even when some of the bolder
actions that do get tested and have been highly successful, a decision has
been made to put the idea to one side.

And in this instance although the test was successful, we had decided that
although a winner, it was the lessons to take away that were more
important. From there we hope to arrive at a banner that draws from the
success but is delivered in a way that is easier on the eye. And as always
we are definitely interested in hearing feedback on such efforts. It does
genuinely guide our work even if it may not appear to.

Regards
Seddon

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 3:17 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> I've been thinking about these inline ads since I first encountered one,
> which I believe was either yesterday or today. I'm uncomfortable with the
> idea of inline ads, but they seem to be clearly delineated from article
> content, and as far as I can tell there is simply no easy way to do on-wiki
> fundraising without a certain amount of distraction to the reader. I don't
> like this practice, but it's hard for me to say that I dislike it any more
> than massive banners. Until WMF has such a large endowment that it no
> longer needs to do online fundraising (which would create a different set
> of financial accountability problems than we have now; maybe or maybe not
> more or less, but different) I'm reluctantly willing to go along with the
> program. If people have some convincing reasons why inline fundraising
> should not happen, I hope that they will speak up. At the moment I think
> it's OK to go with the flow.
>
> In the future I would suggest that this kind of change should be
> communicated ahead of time, on this mailing list and elsewhere. (Unless I
> missed it, which would be my fault.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pine
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > Hey Geni,
> >
> > So this is a style of banner that we have used on mobile over the last
> > year. We have previously had good feedback about the mobile version with
> > people feeling it was less obtrusive to the reader experience. This
> banner
> > that you saw was one of our first attempts at seeing whether transferring
> > this to desktop was even a viable idea.
> >
> > That test showed this design had a huge amount of potential from a
> > fundraising point of view, between a 60% & 90% increase in donations.
> > However we felt that the banner wasn't quite providing the same
> experience
> > as we were getting on mobile. The size was larger and so we think that we
> > can refine the concept so that it remains effective but making it less
> > intrusive both than it’s current form and our current control banner (
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1617_
> > 1117_en6C_dsk_p2_sm_template&force=1&country=US).
> > We are working a number of smaller versions that are a little more in
> > keeping with the experience provided on mobile, so keep in mind this is
> far
> > from a finished version.
> >
> > I would like to emphasis that we are not committed to this. It's
> certainly
> > a change from what we have had in the past and, based on that, both I and
> > my colleagues would genuinely like to hear people's views on this type of
> > banner. For now this banner will be limited to testing and our current
> > small banner (
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1617_
> > 1117_en6C_dsk_p2_sm_template&force=1&country=US)
> > will be remaining our control. We would like to do a few more tests with
> an
> > improved take on this style and I would be happy to share the outcomes of
> > those if it would help inform the discussion.
> >
> > Regards
> > Seddon
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:56 PM, geni  wrote:
> >
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[Gnangarra]

Personally I think the inline banners are invasive to the content, unlike
side bar or top of page banners which dont interfere with the delivery of
content, the page layout or potentially imply association with the topic. I
also recognise that mobile presentation is already degraded to suit the
device so its aesthetics impact would be lower on that medium compared
desktop services.

As I havent encounted one besides the screen shot and samples I cant
comment on the practical aspects of impact on a stub article over that of a
featured article nor how it relates to the subject topic.

On 2 December 2016 at 10:17, Pine W  wrote:

> I've been thinking about these inline ads since I first encountered one,
> which I believe was either yesterday or today. I'm uncomfortable with the
> idea of inline ads, but they seem to be clearly delineated from article
> content, and as far as I can tell there is simply no easy way to do on-wiki
> fundraising without a certain amount of distraction to the reader. I don't
> like this practice, but it's hard for me to say that I dislike it any more
> than massive banners. Until WMF has such a large endowment that it no
> longer needs to do online fundraising (which would create a different set
> of financial accountability problems than we have now; maybe or maybe not
> more or less, but different) I'm reluctantly willing to go along with the
> program. If people have some convincing reasons why inline fundraising
> should not happen, I hope that they will speak up. At the moment I think
> it's OK to go with the flow.
>
> In the future I would suggest that this kind of change should be
> communicated ahead of time, on this mailing list and elsewhere. (Unless I
> missed it, which would be my fault.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pine
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > Hey Geni,
> >
> > So this is a style of banner that we have used on mobile over the last
> > year. We have previously had good feedback about the mobile version with
> > people feeling it was less obtrusive to the reader experience. This
> banner
> > that you saw was one of our first attempts at seeing whether transferring
> > this to desktop was even a viable idea.
> >
> > That test showed this design had a huge amount of potential from a
> > fundraising point of view, between a 60% & 90% increase in donations.
> > However we felt that the banner wasn't quite providing the same
> experience
> > as we were getting on mobile. The size was larger and so we think that we
> > can refine the concept so that it remains effective but making it less
> > intrusive both than it’s current form and our current control banner (
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1617_
> > 1117_en6C_dsk_p2_sm_template&force=1&country=US).
> > We are working a number of smaller versions that are a little more in
> > keeping with the experience provided on mobile, so keep in mind this is
> far
> > from a finished version.
> >
> > I would like to emphasis that we are not committed to this. It's
> certainly
> > a change from what we have had in the past and, based on that, both I and
> > my colleagues would genuinely like to hear people's views on this type of
> > banner. For now this banner will be limited to testing and our current
> > small banner (
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1617_
> > 1117_en6C_dsk_p2_sm_template&force=1&country=US)
> > will be remaining our control. We would like to do a few more tests with
> an
> > improved take on this style and I would be happy to share the outcomes of
> > those if it would help inform the discussion.
> >
> > Regards
> > Seddon
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:56 PM, geni  wrote:
> >
> > > Screenshot of what I mean:
> > >
> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Inline_donor_bannerbass.png
> > >
> > > Inline ads are generally considered to be something that gets into
> > > scummy advertising territory (for example even adblock plus's rather
> > > questionable Acceptable Ad policy doesn't accept them).
> > >
> > >
> > > On a related note the FAQ appears to be out of date:
> > >
> > > https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en
> > >
> > > Unless we are still in the 2015-2016 fiscal year.
> > >
> > > --
> > > geni
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Seddon
> >
> > *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
> > *Wikimedia Foundation*
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[Pine W]

I've been thinking about these inline ads since I first encountered one,
which I believe was either yesterday or today. I'm uncomfortable with the
idea of inline ads, but they seem to be clearly delineated from article
content, and as far as I can tell there is simply no easy way to do on-wiki
fundraising without a certain amount of distraction to the reader. I don't
like this practice, but it's hard for me to say that I dislike it any more
than massive banners. Until WMF has such a large endowment that it no
longer needs to do online fundraising (which would create a different set
of financial accountability problems than we have now; maybe or maybe not
more or less, but different) I'm reluctantly willing to go along with the
program. If people have some convincing reasons why inline fundraising
should not happen, I hope that they will speak up. At the moment I think
it's OK to go with the flow.

In the future I would suggest that this kind of change should be
communicated ahead of time, on this mailing list and elsewhere. (Unless I
missed it, which would be my fault.

Thanks,

Pine


On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Joseph Seddon  wrote:

> Hey Geni,
>
> So this is a style of banner that we have used on mobile over the last
> year. We have previously had good feedback about the mobile version with
> people feeling it was less obtrusive to the reader experience. This banner
> that you saw was one of our first attempts at seeing whether transferring
> this to desktop was even a viable idea.
>
> That test showed this design had a huge amount of potential from a
> fundraising point of view, between a 60% & 90% increase in donations.
> However we felt that the banner wasn't quite providing the same experience
> as we were getting on mobile. The size was larger and so we think that we
> can refine the concept so that it remains effective but making it less
> intrusive both than it’s current form and our current control banner (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1617_
> 1117_en6C_dsk_p2_sm_template&force=1&country=US).
> We are working a number of smaller versions that are a little more in
> keeping with the experience provided on mobile, so keep in mind this is far
> from a finished version.
>
> I would like to emphasis that we are not committed to this. It's certainly
> a change from what we have had in the past and, based on that, both I and
> my colleagues would genuinely like to hear people's views on this type of
> banner. For now this banner will be limited to testing and our current
> small banner (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1617_
> 1117_en6C_dsk_p2_sm_template&force=1&country=US)
> will be remaining our control. We would like to do a few more tests with an
> improved take on this style and I would be happy to share the outcomes of
> those if it would help inform the discussion.
>
> Regards
> Seddon
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:56 PM, geni  wrote:
>
> > Screenshot of what I mean:
> >
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Inline_donor_bannerbass.png
> >
> > Inline ads are generally considered to be something that gets into
> > scummy advertising territory (for example even adblock plus's rather
> > questionable Acceptable Ad policy doesn't accept them).
> >
> >
> > On a related note the FAQ appears to be out of date:
> >
> > https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en
> >
> > Unless we are still in the 2015-2016 fiscal year.
> >
> > --
> > geni
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
> *Wikimedia Foundation*
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[Joseph Seddon]

Hey Geni,

So this is a style of banner that we have used on mobile over the last
year. We have previously had good feedback about the mobile version with
people feeling it was less obtrusive to the reader experience. This banner
that you saw was one of our first attempts at seeing whether transferring
this to desktop was even a viable idea.

That test showed this design had a huge amount of potential from a
fundraising point of view, between a 60% & 90% increase in donations.
However we felt that the banner wasn't quite providing the same experience
as we were getting on mobile. The size was larger and so we think that we
can refine the concept so that it remains effective but making it less
intrusive both than it’s current form and our current control banner (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1617_1117_en6C_dsk_p2_sm_template&force=1&country=US).
We are working a number of smaller versions that are a little more in
keeping with the experience provided on mobile, so keep in mind this is far
from a finished version.

I would like to emphasis that we are not committed to this. It's certainly
a change from what we have had in the past and, based on that, both I and
my colleagues would genuinely like to hear people's views on this type of
banner. For now this banner will be limited to testing and our current
small banner (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1617_1117_en6C_dsk_p2_sm_template&force=1&country=US)
will be remaining our control. We would like to do a few more tests with an
improved take on this style and I would be happy to share the outcomes of
those if it would help inform the discussion.

Regards
Seddon


On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:56 PM, geni  wrote:

> Screenshot of what I mean:
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Inline_donor_bannerbass.png
>
> Inline ads are generally considered to be something that gets into
> scummy advertising territory (for example even adblock plus's rather
> questionable Acceptable Ad policy doesn't accept them).
>
>
> On a related note the FAQ appears to be out of date:
>
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en
>
> Unless we are still in the 2015-2016 fiscal year.
>
> --
> geni
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Seddon

*Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
*Wikimedia Foundation*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Are inline donor banners something we view as acceptable?

[geni]

Screenshot of what I mean:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Inline_donor_bannerbass.png

Inline ads are generally considered to be something that gets into
scummy advertising territory (for example even adblock plus's rather
questionable Acceptable Ad policy doesn't accept them).


On a related note the FAQ appears to be out of date:

https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en

Unless we are still in the 2015-2016 fiscal year.

-- 
geni

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,