2015-01-12 13:25 GMT+01:00 Liam Wyatt <liamwy...@gmail.com>: > With that "busiest time of year" now over, but with all the discussions > still fresh in our mind, I was hoping that the Fundraising team or > Executive would have the time to respond to the various concerns that were > raised here (and elsewhere) about the theory and practice of WMF fundraising. > If responding here isn't appropriate, then at least over on Meta at [[Talk: > Fundraising Principles]] where a fair amount of detail has been compiled, > particularly by WMF Board of Trustees member SJ [2]. > > There were some practical/specific questions, including: > - why isn't fundraising using the same software to receive bug reports ( > phabricator) as everyone else? > - why haven't the crowdsourced banner text suggestions been A/B tested? > - why were new banners shown to people who had chosen to dismiss previous > ones, and why were they allowed take up such a large proportion of the > screen/obscure content? > - has anyone responded to the Russian community yet to their polite and > important question? > [This is a non-exhaustive list, of course] > > 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") > - 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"? > - 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?
I would like to see the answers to these questions myself. I have put them on [[:meta:Talk:Fundraising_principles]] and added a couple of my own. Feel free to add your own questions, my suggestion would be to use that section for questions only and put comments in another section. C [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising_principles#Questions_to_the_fundraising_team_from_Wikimedia-l _______________________________________________ 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>
