svetlana <svetlana@...> writes: > > I wrote: > > > it's usually both sides of the conversation at fault for accumulating their rage instead of > communicating it early > > I unintentionally skipped a couple words. I meant to say: > > > it's usually both sides of the conversation at fault, *such* *as* for accumulating their rage instead of > communicating it early >
I worked for Wikimedia Foundation for a little over four years. Every year I (and many other staff members) have expressed worry about the size and message of the banners. There's been plenty of early communication. Every year we get promises that they'll work on making the banners better. However, it seems when they say better, they mean more effective from the perspective of generating revenue. The message from the fundraising staff and Lila is more of the same. This year I've started having people I know worry that Wikipedia is in financial trouble. It makes me feel ashamed when I have to tell them Wikipedia is in fact fine, but that the foundation uses this messaging to more effectively drive donations. It makes them angry to hear it. I'm not trying to paint this as us vs them. I'm trying to express that planting heads firmly in the sand is not an effective approach to dealing with the brand damage that's readily apparent on social media. - Ryan _______________________________________________ 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>
