One feedback I got today is to not display the banner any more if the person donated. On Dec 3, 2015 16:37, "Liam Wyatt" <liamwy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> TL;DR - we've reached "peak banner", how do we change the fundraising > model to be about working smarter, not just pushing harder. This needs > to be part of a broader process that involves strategic planning > transparency, endowment discussions, editor-recruitment, etc. Not just > about fullscreen advertising. > > I, along with many here, am dismayed that the banners are now at the > stage of being fullscreen. However, as others have mentioned, the > actual text of the request has been adjusted following a reasonably > collaborative process to identify text that is both effective and > acceptable to the community. Also, the fundraising team have been > placed in the difficult position of being told to raise a LOT more > money without being given more methods to do so.[1] Naturally then, > there is a point where the existing methods reach their maximum > effectiveness, and capacity is stretched to the point where awkward > mistakes happen.[2] > > At this point, I suspect we've reached "peak banner". > > Rather like "peak oil" - after drilling the same oil reserve for a > long time, you have to pump exponentially harder to maintain a steady > flow.[2] Furthermore, the harder you pump today, the more difficult it > will be tomorrow. I think we've reached that point with the > fundraising advertising and emails. We know that the donation amounts > are decreasing, but the budget is increasing. There are many suggested > reasons for the decreased supply (relevant parables for this include > "killing the goose that laid the golden egg" and "the boy who cried > wolf"). So it's now time to talk about pumping smarter, not harder. > > An important part of that shift is the recently-opened (but longtime > mooted) discussion about an endowment. I commend Lisa's essay[3] as an > excellent start to formulating a long-term plan. There are many > important questions that would need to be answered as part of that > strategy. People interested in this really ought to read her thoughts > on creating a "growing endowment" and the advantages/challenges this > would bring. Carefully and consultatively addressing the challenges in > creating an endowment would also go a long way towards fixing other > related concerns: > > - Improving the transparency of the WMF strategy and the way decisions > are made (see also the discussion about the FDC recommendations[4]) > - Having the global community, especially the Chapters which have > local fundraising capacity, involved in the fundraising process - > rather than being held at arms length. The community should be seen as > the fundraiser's biggest asset, not the pageview numbers. > - culturally sensitive communication (to avoid things like the email > saying "let's end this" being translated into French as the > *equivalent* of "I challenge you to a fight to the death") > - Integrating the activities of fundraising as "part of the movement" > rather than as something that is held/holds itself apart. The WMF > donor database, for example, has tens of thousands of people who would > be interested in learning to edit. Why have we never tried to create a > [privacy-policy-compliant] way of introducing those people to their > local communities/chapters to help address the other strategic > challenge of "editor recruitment and retention". > - Addressing some of the inequities of how money is > raised/disseminated across our movement which are based on rules > "grandfathered in" from chapter-fundraising rules prior to the "Haifa > letter". > - movement calendars (to avoid things like this year's fundraising > clash with WikiLovesMonuments) > > Some people say that the fundraising goal is too high. Perhaps, but we > also have a long list of fixes-needed and wanted-features. We can't do > a lot more with a lot less, although we can certainly increase the > efficiency/transparency of how the existing WMF budget is spent! > However, with the increased total budget, also comes a increased > expectation of results. I think that a lot of my own frustration comes > from this - I could probably be supportive of a fullscreen banner IF I > felt the results justified it. But, for just one example, as Andrea > described today[5], Wikisource has NEVER received any dedicated > support despite years of that community begging for it. > > I've probably written too much now... sorry! > > -Liam > > [1] Side note: If you'd like to apply for what is think is probably > the hardest (and therefore very important) job in Wikimedia, WMF > Fundraising is hiring a community-liaison role: > https://boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jobs/113040?t=26r71l > [2] like saying "A year ago, you gave 0.00 € to keep Wikipedia online > and ad-free." https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120214 > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil Yes, I realise the metaphor > isn't perfect. Oil is a non-renewable resource while donations are > potentially renewable. > [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Endowment_Essay > [4] and thank you Lila for your response on that topic thus far > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-November/079940.html > [5] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-December/080150.html > wittylama.com > Peace, love & metadata > > > On 3 December 2015 at 09:16, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Article in the Washington Post: > > > > > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12/02/wikipedia-has-a-ton-of-money-so-why-is-it-begging-you-to-donate-yours/ > > _______________________________________________ > > 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>
