>> > This is totally understandable, especially on the basis of 1 focus > group. The one thing that is nice is that a lot of the data that we > got > from the focus group matched up with the data from the donor survey > which helps validate it some. But again the real important data is > actual concrete testing data that we've both gotten and will be > getting > a lot more of over the next month. It is THAT data that will really > inform us on what messages, landing pages, design etc work the best. > > James
James speaks my mind here as well. It's not the fact that we did a focus group that's important - it's the fact that the findings from that focus group lined up and correlated with data from a past donor survey (which was conducted by an entirely separate firm with no interaction to the firm that conducted the focus group) and our own testing. Instead of having a single data point, we have several. We'll keep gathering data, of course, and constantly re-evaluating our findings, but this was the first time we were able to define - in a data-driven way - these common themes. Oh, and ... regarding another post on this thread... zOMG! jedi effects? I can haz? pb ____________________ Philippe Beaudette Head of Reader Relations Wikimedia Foundation [email protected] 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 _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
