> > It's clear that this year, the fundraiser could easily raise much more > than the revenue goals, thanks to dramatic increases in banner > effectiveness. It probably wouldn't even "cost" that much in terms of
annoying readers -- not like ~2 months of 100% banners from previous > years. While true; I've been trawling around the web reading articles about our fundraiser and though the articles have mostly been positive I have read several that are substantially negative. What's even more worrying is the number of comments on all the articles I've read which are starting to have a tone that we're misrepresenting what we're doing, that we're misspending the money, and even more concerning to me, that we already have more than enough money and that we're turning into a glutton. It's hard to find effective and responsible > ways to spend that much donor money, but I guess now is the time to > start thinking more ambitiously about future budgets. I think it might also be time to begin to rethink about how to responsibly fundraise -- we've moved far beyond needing money just for servers which is the message we've left a lot of donors with in previous years. Zack and Megan have made a good start with moving this perception but there's still shaping left to be done. Until we do move it though, because of the sentiment I've been seeing I feel like we should be extra careful -- especially in the arena of raising extra money that we do not already have allocated and approved. ~Matt Walker _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
