>
> > 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>

Reply via email to