intrigeri:
> sajolida:
>> One day we'll have a better color palette :(
>
> IIRC there are tools that generate one for you, given a few parameters
> (I'm optimistic enough to believe that providing two colors may be
> enough parameters) so perhaps that's not a hard task. Anyone willing
> to give it a try, enjoy!
Why not. I was more thinking about a color palette designed by a human
with skills in the field, but if robots can help us getting started,
then why not.
>> 3. Wrote a text for the left part, filling up the white space.
>> I actually wrote that a while ago and I thought I sent it to you in my
>> previous email but apparently I didn't...
>
> I like it. Maybe this is important enough to be reviewed by native
> English language geeks?
I'll ask Gemini Matt then.
>> 6. Combined DrWhax's suggestion for the introductory sentence with the
>> previous one. Now we have: "Show your friends that you care about
>> privacy and Internet freedom and encourage others to do the same!".
>
> The two occurrences of "and" in a row, that have different roles in
> the sentence, makes it a bit confusing to me.
>
> Maybe adding a comma helps a bit: "Show your friends that you care
> about privacy and Internet freedom, and encourage others to do the
> same!".
Let's do that.
> Or: "Show your friends that you care about privacy and Internet
> freedom! Encourage others to do the same!".
>
>> 7. I didn't add a $43 because it's very close from $50 and I didn't have
>> data about whether the possible extra attractiveness for geeks would
>> overweight the extra space and looking weird to everybody else who
>> doesn't understand the insider's joke.
>
> I agree it's not clear cut; let's not do it (too bad, I really liked
> the idea :)
>
> (Meta: it's very unlikely that we can ever make such a decision based
> on actual data, so let's not raise the bar for suggestions to
> unrealistic levels.)
Before answering this I searched through the crowdfunding analysis of
Karsten from Tor [1] and didn't see any reflection on this in
particular. They have a $23 but that's the only value between $10 and
$100 so the raw data of how many people gave $23 won't really help.
[1]:
https://people.torproject.org/~karsten/volatile/crowdfunding-analysis.pdf
Quantitative data could be gathered doing A/B testing (changing $50 into
$42 50% of the time). Since we have JavaScript on this page already that
might not be very hard to code. I would personally find it a funny
experiment to analyze (our first A/B test!) but I won't write the
JavaScript code myself.
Qualitative data could be gathered doing some user testing on a version
with $42. 5 people would suffice.
>> 8. Display bitcoin address.
>
> FYI the attached screenshots don't show the bottom of the page.
Here you go!
>> 9. Regarding the financial reports, I'm not yet decided. On the one hand
>> I want to avoid as much as possible providing links outside of this
>> page: once people land on this page we want them to make a donation and
>> not jump elsewhere and forget to go back (you know how people browser
>> the web...).
>
> Indeed, that's a very important point.
>
>> But that's also a legitimate information to have here...
>
> Not only it's legitimate, but also I _guess_ that being told what the
> money is used for can help motivate people to donate.
>
>> So I thought about adding more info on the page itself,
>
> Yes! I think that's the best way to handle this.
>
>> like a pie chart, maybe in a toggle.
>> See https://supporters.eff.org/donate/button. And maybe also a link
>> to the financial statements anyway but quite small then.
>
> I like the idea of a toggleable area, hidden by default. A pie chart
> would be ideal, but if time is scarce, a bullet list of the biggest
> expense accounts with percentages would already be great :)
I'll do all this later because this would require publishing our
financial report from 2015 and this will take more days.
It's #11794.
Now I'll move on to preparing the banners for the website.
> Just curious: is it on purpose that no goal is set for this donation
> campaign? Is it because we don't have an easy way to display its
> progress yet? If it is so, I wonder: perhaps setting a clear goal,
> even without progress indication, would help potential donors
> understand what the order of magnitude is, how much money we need to
> keep the thing rolling. I'm not sure.
Yes, it's on purpose.
First, yes we have no way of displaying the progress (but we could set
the goal and write regular updates). Second, we have no clue on what
would be a realistic goal and aiming too high or too low could be
counterproductive (that was the reasoning behind Tor not setting any
goal last year and I followed them on this).
So I'll mark this branch as Ready for QA.
