> > > On 12 Jan 2015, at 11:25 pm, Liam Wyatt <liamwy...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Now that the 2014 Fundraising campaign has finished and which, according > to > > a WMF blogpost from a week ago, "surpassed our goal of $20 million" >
According to the data provided at https://frdata.wikimedia.org/ the Foundation seems to have taken $30.6 million over the period from December 2 2014 to December 31 2014. This is $10.6 million more than the $20 million fundraising goal indicated in the blog post. (At any rate, that's the sum I get; I'd welcome anyone double-checking my math.) > (receiving donations from 2.5 million people in 4 weeks) [1], I hope that > > the fundraising team has had the time to get some well-earned rest and > > relaxation over the new-year period. > > > But there were also more fundamental/theoretical questions, including: > > - what degree of 'urgency' is morally acceptable in a donation request, > > especially when the financial situation of the WMF has never been > > healthier/stable? (e.g. threatening phrases like "keep us online and > > ad-free for another year") > This is my main concern too. > > - Is the practice of "finishing the fundraiser period as fast as possible > > by any means" the correct interpretation of the the official fundraising > > principle of "minimal disruption"? > As for the fundraiser's duration, I believe the 2014 fundraiser ran for 30 days (December 2 to December 31, 2014). This is longer than last year, and at any rate much longer than 2012, right? Because according to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2013 – "In 2012, we were able to shorten the fundraiser down to nine full days, the shortest fundraiser we've had." Andreas > > - Is the official fundraising principle of "maximal participation" being > > adhered to? That principle calls for "empowering individuals to > > constructively contribute to direct messaging, public outreach..." Does > the > > WMF Board believe this has happened? > > - Is the current "we don't like asking for money so just give it to us > and > > we'll stop annoying you" approach to fundraising (implied by the final > > phrase in the final 2014 campaign email "Please help us forget > fundraising and > > get back to improving Wikipedia.") potentially damaging to the Wikimedia > > brand value, even if it does raise the money in the short term? Lila said > > that there has been "sentiment analysis" done about this, what was the > > result? > > > > -Liam > > > > [1] http://blog.wikimedia > > .org/2015/01/05/thank-you-for-keeping-knowledge-free-and-accessible/ > > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising_principles > _______________________________________________ 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>
