I just saw this pop up in Wikipedia, and it occurred to me that this is a great example of how not to run a business: don't insult your customers.
Did the people writing this marketing guilt trip even realize that Wikipedia was built by community contributions?
Other urls found in this thread:
cbsnews.com
twitter.com
Op is a faggot who wants to end up with dickpill ads on Wikipedia
this made me change my Amazon Smile donations from going to Wikipedia to the Internet Archive
most people who contribute to writing wiki articles are either mentally ill, unemployed or both. they dont generate shit for jimmy whales. he needs goy shekels from people who actually put a shift in in the real world.
Even dickpill ads are better than this passive aggressive shit.
That's one thousand dollars worth of link
You forgot: people paid to write articles. Shills.
I disagree. It honestly is not even that passive aggressive. Maybe you just have a guilty conscience
Imagine being this much of a boomer. Your even so low test you made a post projecting about your insecurities caused by a sentence thats barely even demanding really, and to top it off you think your qualified for judging what caliber of buisness desicion that is. You were probably on wikipedia in first place to make fake edits on the hitler page you boomer kike.
Meh....I get the 'guilt trip' argument but honestly I just see it more as them laying a good case as to why you and other users throwing 3 measly dollars would make a major difference in stopping them from begging so damn frequently
It actually almost made me want to donate. 3 dollars is nothing; I'm broke but not THAT broke. And God knows I use wikipedia constantly
>I just saw this pop up in Wikipedia, and it occurred to me that this is a great example of how not to run a business: don't insult your customers.
>Did the people writing this marketing guilt trip even realize that Wikipedia was built by community contributions?
Whoever wrote that up has no sales skills or ability to influence people. By stating that 99% of their readers don't give, it makes the reader feel like the common sense thing to do would be to not give. Not only because everyone chooses not to give, but knowing that their $2.75 will be worthless since 99% of people are donating $0. Saying "The price of your Wednesday coffee is all we need." also sounds desperate and almost offensively pushy.
>Hey! We need your help! Please donate to Wikipedia to keep the website running afloat, because without your donation we won't be able to afford to keep the site operational for long. The average donation we receive is around $15, but every dollar counts and we appreciate.
Just imagine that with better copywriting.
>Wikipedia was built by community contributions?
not really a 'community' since one guy writes most of it - cbsnews.com
>It honestly is not even that passive aggressive
This user gets it
They're being direct..."look, obviously you guys don't have to, but we're just saying: 3 buck from each of you and we'll stop bothering you for a couple of years"
Wikipedia is a great resource for third worlders but must be taken with a grain of salt because everyone has an agenda when writing articles. Look up the articles on white nationalism and jewish nationalism to see how skewed it is
>Hey! We need your help! Please donate to Wikipedia to keep the website running afloat, because without your donation we won't be able to afford to keep the site operational for long. The average donation we receive is around $15, but every dollar counts and we appreciate.
1000x better
Wikipedia is a shithole. 95% of the writers do nothing and 99% of the bots are involved in Nerd Editing wars with other nerds. Basically, Losers with no real power in the real world fight tooth and nail over whether or not the letter B is capitalized in an article, or what picture of poop will be used in the feces article. This is A majority of what goes on in wikipedia day to day. Wikipedia also spends only like 5% of its donations on maintaining the site, the rest goes to miscellaneous mysteries, probably yachts and asian prostitutes for the wiki staff, who do nothing btw. Wikipedia is a massive fucking scam and exists only as a playground for autism and bitch fights. FUCK WIKIPEDIA
>Wikipedia also spends only like 5% of its donations on maintaining the site, the rest goes to miscellaneous mysteries
Not calling you a liar but some sources would go great with this
Maybe it was a smart decision by them, who knows? If nobody understands what I'm talking about, then maybe their marketing strategy is a winner.
Wikipedia would never have gotten to where it is today without those community contributions. That's what I'm talking about. Wikipedia didn't just spring up one day with millions of articles and stubs for people to start 'leeching' off of it, ordinary readers contributed to it until it reached the point where it's the biggest encyclopedia on the internet. But if people aren't able to draw this connection, then I guess it doesn't matter.
Where are getting these numbers from?
Well that's interesting.
I just looked up something else and got a different message now.
>Not calling you a liar
Why not
>Wikipedia web master browses Jow Forums confirmed.
Wikipedia has no right to want donations. Instead they could just fuck off am put everything on IPFS and not bother about cost for hosting anymore. Stop being a dinosaur, Jimmy!
As many problems as there are with Wikipedia, I don't think it's wrong for them to ask for donations. I just made this thread because as someone who did contribute early on, around 2002-2004, it's insulting to see this stuff. Without early editors, they wouldn't have a platform to hit people up for money on and they'd just be another tech start-up in the crowd with their hands out for easy VC money.
I hate coffee. So you can have the price of my next coffee.