John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
>Some declared fundraising principles, which everyone agrees and
>adheres to, would be good.
"Resolution:Wikimedia fundraising principles"
"Resolution:Developing Scenarios for future of fundraising"
We also have:
James Heilman wrote:
> 2) When is it okay to run smaller commercial ads rather than larger
>fundraising banners? Never. I would much rather see the WMF become
>smaller than to see ads run.
We already have advertising on Wikipedia. What if Harvard University, the
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, or the Electronic Frontier Foundation
were willing pay the Wikimedia Foundation a few million dollars for a
short and unobtrusive ad campaign? It doesn't have to be Monsanto or
Coca-Cola buying ad space, it could be a like-minded organization that has
extra money and supports the Wikimedia Foundation's mission.
I agree with John that gift-matching is an activity that we should
re-explore. It's not unprecedented, as he notes. If a company like Virgin
were willing to triple or quadruple each donation received in exchange for
a small logo in a fund-raising ad, doesn't that merit consideration?
I also agree with John that greater efficiency, including smarter use of
volunteers, would go far toward a more sustainable fund-raising model.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: