Thank you very much for this update, Caitlin.

Yesterday I was thinking more about this issue, and today I was planning to
append my earlier comments by saying that I realize that a fundraising
appeal has some differences from an encyclopedia article in terms of
writing style. Also, I realize that sometimes what seems good from one
perspective is problematic from a different perspective.

Perhaps at a time when the Fundraising team is less busy, maybe in January,
there could be an opportunity for a public discussion such as an IRC office
hour, Hangouts meeting, and/or talk page discussion about how to
incorporate community review of Fundraising messages prior to them going
into production.

Thanks again for the update, and thanks for listening.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )


On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 5:17 PM Caitlin Cogdill <ccogd...@wikimedia.org>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thank you for sharing your concerns. We hear them and we take them
> seriously. *As of today, we have pulled this subject line from our testing
> rotation.*
>
> On the Fundraising team, we pride ourselves on making data-driven
> decisions, and there are many types of data inputs we process outside of
> dollar amount raised. For example, how many people choose to unsubscribe
> from our list or submit an abuse complaint when we send an email? Does a
> certain subject line get very high opens but a low rate of donations per
> open--indicating that it is more clickbait than effective content? How much
> and what kind of feedback is our Donor Services team getting?
>
> We watched these inputs closely while sending this subject line to donors.
> Our unsubscribe and abuse rates were low, the donation per open rate was
> even higher than usual, and while our Donor Services team flagged some
> negative responses from donors, they determined these comments were not in
> a significant volume.
>
> That said, there is a final input which is harder to measure on a per-test
> basis: how do we, our colleagues, and volunteers feel about our messaging?
> This team cares deeply about Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation, and
> about the mission we all work to achieve. We want to represent it
> faithfully, and do so in a way our readers and donors can engage with and
> understand. This balance can be really hard to strike and it will always be
> an ongoing challenge in our work.
>
> We are grateful to be presented with this challenge and with the joy of
> telling millions of people about this movement. Thank you for caring so
> deeply, for all your contributions, and for keeping this feedback loop
> alive.
>
> Sincerely,
> Caitlin
>
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 1:47 PM Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >  Hi Seddon,
> >
> > While the fundraising appeal may be successful, the problem that I have
> > with this subject line is that it can mislead readers into thinking that
> > someone with the ability to do so is seriously considering, or making an
> > effort to, delete Wikipedia in entirety. I think that a subject line of
> > "Block Wikipedia?" might be okay, and I am supportive of encouraging
> people
> > not to take Wikipedia for granted. But regarding "Delete Wikipedia?", as
> > far as I know that generally misrepresents the current situation. I
> believe
> > that using "Delete Wikipedia?" as a subject line is inconsistent with
> > Wikipedia's goals of providing neutral, verifiable, and reliable
> > information.
> >
> > I am starting to think that if WMF wants to use the Wikipedia brand name
> > for WMF fundraising then WMF should first publicly discuss its proposed
> > uses of the Wikipedia brand name with Wikipedians.
> >
> > On a related issue, I don't know if it's happening this year, but in the
> > past another concern that I've had is the conflation of donating to
> > Wikipedia with donating to WMF. Wikipedia and WMF are related but there
> is
> > not a 1:1 relationship, and I hope that WMF makes that clear in its
> > fundraising. The use of "Delete Wikipedia?" reminds me of these concerns.
> >
> > I would prefer to avoid diverting the community's limited time into
> > reviewing WMF's choices, but unfortunately the issues are too significant
> > to ignore. I don't know how many community members want to volunteer
> their
> > time to review fundraising appeals before they go into production, but I
> > think that it would be good for WMF to ask.
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> Caitlin Cogdill
> Senior Fundraising Email Manager
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
>
> *https://donate.wikimedia.org <https://donate.wikimedia.org/>*
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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