> On Sep 2, 2015, at 11:17 AM, Gergo Tisza <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> For what it's worth, the line " For one thing, they can turn out
>> negative, in which case we will have been spared a philosophical
>> debate about openness." comes off as very snarky and also entirely the
>> wrong approach.
>
>
> Debates about the Wikimedia ethos tend to be highly subjective and thus
> costly both in terms of time and emotional resources. Measuring whether
> banners work is fairly simple and objective. It makes sense to perform the
> cheapest prerequisite checks first, to minimize total cost.
Part of the cost of business in being transparent and actually _having_
an ethos is that these conversations need to be had, regardless of their cost.
And I seriously doubt that there's any benefit to these banner ads at
all. Converting a small number of people from using the web version to an app
version is meaningless when operating at this scale. We're actually probably
_reducing_ the number of readers overall because many will simply say "screw
this if you're serving me interstitials".
This was a bad idea. It remains a bad idea. It looks bad on the
movement.
---
Brandon Harris :: [email protected] :: made of steel wool and whiskey
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
