[Foundation-l] Is a research banner "advertising" of the evil sort?

Fri Dec 9 15:38:12 UTC 2011

On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:

> Perhaps, although I hardly think that was part of the nefarious plan
> on the part of Harvard and SciPo. They are both among the institutions
> in the world with the best and most positive name penetration; the
> connection benefits Wikipedia as much as it does them, and none of the
> three are much in need of PR work with the small subset of Wikipedia
> editors who saw the banner.

I'm sure that argument could be made for several hundred other institutions
and research project who would love to have the same visibility. Should it
matter if the conducting research institution happens to be the worlds best
or have the most positive name penetration?

I see it as the same, all or nothing approach. Either we choose to have
advertisement or we don't, we should not cherry-pick institutions, and
projects deemed worthy of a banner.

The timing is also a large aspect that is not being considered. The recent
fundraiser repeatedly used the same narrative of asking for donation for a
small non-profit so we won't have to turn to advertising, half way in, we
have a banner from Harvard and SciPro asking to take part in a survey that
apparently pays out respondents.

I suppose it's a matter of perspective.

Regards
Theo