Hi Toby,

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Toby Negrin <tneg...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Hi Folks --
>
> I would suggest that if you are unhappy with the banners you apply your
> energy to the annual planning process[1]. As long as the budget goes up 20%
> year over year and page views fall, the Fundraising team will need to crank
> up the banners.
>

There are few things to address related to your suggestion:

1) Some banners involve messages that can clearly invoke potential donors
to donate for a reason they think they are donating for, but in reality
that reason is not completely valid. Those messages really should not be
shown, whether they are for meeting a budget need or any other reason.
Every person in the movement should agree on this simple statement and
support the Fundraising team for not showing those messages.

2) Banners are our most outward facing signals, especially when they
involve requests for donations. What goes to the banner is the face of the
Movement, not the Foundation (because we know many people don't know what
is the difference between Wikipedia, for example, and the source who is
asking for donation), so it's essential for our many volunteers to get
behind its message. Some things are the matter of taste and we can never
make everyone happy with, some things are more generally understood as
problematic: we need to address those.

3) The argument here is not that the Fundraising team should not crank up,
of course if they are asked to deliver more they should do something
differently. The issue is about the content of the messages and what they
deliver. If the Fundraising techniques with all the correct messages the
Movement can get behind don't deliver as much as the budget requires, then
the Movement should brainstorm about what to do. That conversation can
involve budget cuts, new approaches for raising more money, showing ads,
etc. My point is, we should make this decision together so we can all
support it. Raising money is not the Foundation's problem only, it's the
Movement's problem, and we need to solve it together.

4) The Fundraising team needs to get the budget they need to operate in a
way that is healthy for them and the movement. If they don't, all of us in
the Foundation should help them get the resources they need, if that means
some of us giving 10% of our time to the team, so be it. I'm happy to offer
that time if I see we, as a whole, are willing to make a difference, but I
would advocate for the team getting what they need in the first place
without extra help because it's a critical team.

5) The Fundraising team has been very receptive to my comments (both on the
meta page and offline) and I will talk to them offline some time next week
as well. I'm going to slow down a bit on this thread after couple of more
emails. :-)

Best,
Leila


> -Toby
>
> [1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2015-2016_Annual_Plan
>
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I want to be clear about my previous message -- I am not questioning any
> > individual person's integrity in the process, and I know from firsthand
> > experience that a tremendous amount of good work goes into this stuff.
> But
> > I think the process that has evolved around developing the campaign is
> > broken.
> >
> > In Megan's message, I see a great deal of emphasis on the specific points
> > that are attributable to community suggestions/requests. But there is a
> > bigger point that gets lost: It's not about where the ideas come from,
> it's
> > about whether the final result "gets it right."
> >
> > If the WMF produced mission-compatible banners without any community
> > consultation at all, I'd be happy, and I think most others would be too.
> > Running an open process is not the right way to measure success here. An
> > open process is one of many ways to surface problems, and maybe to
> generate
> > ideas; but it's not the be-all end-all.
> >
> > The fund-raising department is clearly held accountable on its
> > easily-measured performance. It needs to also be held accountable to the
> > mission. How to do that is a difficult design and management problem,
> and I
> > don't pretend to have the perfect answer. But it's something that needs
> to
> > be done.
> >
> > Pete
> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree, that banner does not reflect the values of this movement. Pure
> > > and simple; it's not a grey area, and not worth my time to discuss for
> > the
> > > 97th time.
> > >
> > > Personally, I long ago gave up participating in these discussions, for
> > the
> > > most part -- because the same valid points get made over and over
> again,
> > > and the same *AWFUL* errors are made year after year in the
> fund-raising
> > > campaign.
> > >
> > > Leila's post here is heartening, and I'm glad that somebody has the
> > energy
> > > to articulate the concerns so well. I, myself, do not; I have simply
> lost
> > > faith in the integrity of the Wikimedia Foundation's fund-raising
> > > operation. I am, honestly, ashamed to tell people that I used to work
> in
> > > the fund-raising department there (though I believe the work we did was
> > > valuable).
> > >
> > > I recently heard from a high-ranking executive at a software company.
> She
> > > told me that she had given money to the Wikimedia Foundation, and then
> > > looked into the WMF's budget, and the messages in the campaign she had
> > > responded to. The word she used to describe her feeling was
> "mortified."
> > > She had considered asking for her money back, but had decided against
> it.
> > >
> > > Fortunately, she was sophisticated enough not apply her negative
> feelings
> > > to Wikipedia, but rather to the Wikimedia Foundation. But can the WMF
> > > afford to assume that will always be the case?
> > >
> > > Apparently, the thinking thus far is, "yes."
> > >
> > > -Pete
> > > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Leila Zia <le...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Megan,
> > >>
> > >> Thank you for the update and all the hard work the team has done
> during
> > >> Q1.
> > >> My comments below.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Megan Hernandez <
> > mhernan...@wikimedia.org
> > >> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > The team has used this first quarter to test a wide variety of brand
> > new
> > >> > banners. From images, to banners highlighting photos from Commons,
> and
> > >> > different messages, we’ve found a few new ways to share the
> > fundraising
> > >> > message with Wikipedia readers. With updated designs, we’ve ended
> the
> > >> > quarter with a banner that performs roughly 20% better than the
> best-
> > >> > performing banner from last quarter.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I saw that banner and I want to do all I can to help you not use it
> even
> > >> if
> > >> it performs 20% better. I put my story in p.s. so it's easier to skip
> > for
> > >> whoever chooses to skip. This is a true story. :-\
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > Better performing banners are required
> > >> > to raise a higher budget with declining traffic. We’ll continue
> > testing
> > >> new
> > >> > banners into the next quarter and sharing highlights as we go.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> I've said this couple of times in the past through different channels
> > >> (sorry to those of you who have heard this before) but I think it's
> key
> > to
> > >> repeat it here just so we are all clear about what we know and what we
> > >> don't know.
> > >>
> > >> We know that our pageviews are not growing globally (depending on how
> > you
> > >> look at the trend and predictions, they are going down with a slow
> slope
> > >> or
> > >> are almost flat, neither case is good.).
> > >>
> > >> We also know that a higher budget means more work for Furndraising to
> > meet
> > >> the budget.
> > >>
> > >> We do not know the relation between the decline in pageviews and our
> > >> ability to raise money, we do not have research evidence for the above
> > >> statement given the data we have, so I highly encourage all of us not
> to
> > >> repeat this statement (even though it sounds very intuitive) until we
> > show
> > >> such evidence because the more we say it, the more we believe it.
> Ellery
> > >> explains what we know and don't know about this specific topic when I
> > ask
> > >> him a question about this in Metrics Meeting in April 2015. That
> > >> discussion
> > >> is recorded starting minute 37, second 38 here
> > >> <
> > >>
> >
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/WMF_Monthly_Metrics_Meeting_April_8%2C_2015.ogv
> > >> >
> > >> .
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> Leila
> > >>
> > >> p.s. Here is the story:
> > >> I open my laptop at 5:30am to check few definitions on Wikipedia for
> an
> > >> upcoming early morning meeting. The room is dark and the only source
> of
> > >> light is my laptop, I go to Wikipedia and I see that banner
> > >> <
> > >>
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising#/media/File:Sept2015BannerEx.png
> > >> >.
> > >> I'm still sleepy, and probably my mind is not functioning the way it
> > >> normally does, nevertheless, here is what comes to my mind: I have a
> > >> sudden
> > >> feeling of fear. I see a very black background, and I think someone
> very
> > >> important has died. I look a bit more, and I see some red colors,
> then I
> > >> think something in the order of SOPA has happened. I'm getting quite
> > >> nervous. I look at the text, but it's too long for me to parse it at
> > that
> > >> moment with the thoughts I have in the background. I look more at the
> > >> background, I see some orange colors, some yellow colors, and a little
> > >> human circled, I first think that whole color combination is a flame
> > (red,
> > >> orange, yellow, and the semi shape of a flame), then I think someone
> is
> > >> jailed/executed. My eyes finally manage to see the right-hand-side of
> > the
> > >> page, and I see there are dollar signs and numbers. I sigh in relief,
> > and
> > >> then I get really upset (though I manage to pass that stage soon).
> Now,
> > if
> > >> I was not involved in the movement, I'm not sure if I would pay or not
> > >> (maybe I would) seeing that banner, but because I'm in the Movement, I
> > got
> > >> really sad seeing myself going through that experience because I know
> > >> more.
> > >> I also acknowledge that different people have different backgrounds
> and
> > >> experiences in life. What I see as a sign of death and war, may not
> be a
> > >> signal for many other people (though the color black is almost
> > universally
> > >> used for signalling death), and I acknowledge that you cannot
> > accommodate
> > >> everyone. But please be aware, some people get really scared seeing
> this
> > >> kind of banner.
> > >>
> > >> I said the story above, but I also want to say that I understand the
> > >> pressure on you. I've said it here
> > >> <
> > >>
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2015-16_Fundraising_ideas#Banner_test_ideas
> > >> >
> > >> (and btw, huge thanks for being open to suggestions :-), and I'm
> saying
> > it
> > >> here as well: I'm happy to help us to fix such an experience for our
> > >> users.
> > >> Please let me know if you're open to test new designs. I'm more than
> > happy
> > >> to help you for some time for us to bring in more designers and
> > community
> > >> members into this conversation. I'm sure we can do this.
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> >
> > >> > Megan Hernandez
> > >> >
> > >> > Director of Online Fundraising
> > >> > Wikimedia Foundation
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > >> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > >> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > ,
> > >> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> <
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
> > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> > >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to