Policy talk:Fundraising principles: Difference between revisions
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Chuq in topic Transparency...
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
→Transparency...: new section |
||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
:: I don't know the answers to these specific cases, nor how long it takes to implement changes. These issues do get regular consideration; I was glad to see a number of new ways to donate implemented in the past year, regionally and globally. <span style="background-color:white;color:#bbb;">–[[User:Sj|SJ]]<small> [[User Talk:Sj|<font style="color:#f90;">talk</font>]] </small></span> 04:23, 4 December 2014 (UTC) |
:: I don't know the answers to these specific cases, nor how long it takes to implement changes. These issues do get regular consideration; I was glad to see a number of new ways to donate implemented in the past year, regionally and globally. <span style="background-color:white;color:#bbb;">–[[User:Sj|SJ]]<small> [[User Talk:Sj|<font style="color:#f90;">talk</font>]] </small></span> 04:23, 4 December 2014 (UTC) |
||
== Transparency... == |
|||
''"All Wikimedia fundraising activities must be truthful with prospective donors."'' I'm a bit concerned at the fact that this is listed as a principle signed off by the board, yet people have reported (on wikimedia-l) at having to "set things straight" with their friends who had been shocked and surprised at the wording which was being used. -- [[User:Chuq|Chuq]] ([[User talk:Chuq|talk]]) 07:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:10, 4 December 2014
Wittylama had a few comments about fundraising principles, particularly as applied to the annual coordinated banner campaign. Reposted here:
- "easily dismissible on mobile" (...the impossibly-small "x" icon to dismiss...)
- I also find it hard to use the "X" icons we have for dismissing interfaces and overlays: both these banners and elsewhere.
- "Tell the OTRS team and appropriate Chapter (when applicable) when any major change (such as adding/removing a new payment method) happens in that language/country.
- "Maximal Participation: ...we should empower individuals and groups world-wide to constructively contribute to direct messaging."
- rather than being ambassadors for our mission, wikimedians are feeling increasingly embarrassed
- "Minimal disruption: ...causing minimal disruption and annoyance for users of the projects"
- Instead, a desire to finish fundraising quickly is given higher priority.
- As you say, "less disruption" != "shorter". I wonder what the fundraising team's internal measures of disruption/annoyance are: I know they are aiming for low disruption, not just short duration. For example, we now have a larger proportion of fundraising done continuously throughout the year in part because that is less disruptive.
- I would be glad to see a longer campaign with better side effects. For instance, a campaign that leaves everyone who sees it feeling more inspired and enthusiastic, motivated to recruit others to get involved, rather than annoyed or guilty or concerned. I don't know how possible this is, but it's worth trying and striving for. –SJ talk
- "Internationalism: ...our fundraising practices must support the easiest possible transfer of money internationally."
- we've had the recent discussions about how donating is difficult from the Netherlands and impossible from Russia
- I don't know the answers to these specific cases, nor how long it takes to implement changes. These issues do get regular consideration; I was glad to see a number of new ways to donate implemented in the past year, regionally and globally. –SJ talk 04:23, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Transparency...
"All Wikimedia fundraising activities must be truthful with prospective donors." I'm a bit concerned at the fact that this is listed as a principle signed off by the board, yet people have reported (on wikimedia-l) at having to "set things straight" with their friends who had been shocked and surprised at the wording which was being used. -- Chuq (talk) 07:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)