RationalWiki talk:Fundraiser
[edit] 666
Is that really at $666?
moral 13:22, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- I see $75.00. TyAnnoy 13:24, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- Yep, we are at $666, there are so many layers of aggressive caching between the wiki, server and your browser that it may take time till you get the updated number without purging your own cache. 72.38.27.39 (talk) 13:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Typo
I'm not sure if it's supposed to read as such but the widget reads "towards are goal" instead of "towards our goal". That should probably be fixed or [sic]'d or something. 130.156.4.250 (talk) 15:30, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- Phonetics our for people with busy brains.

01:51, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- And here I was thinking that it should be "towards our goat".
ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.
18:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
- And here I was thinking that it should be "towards our goat".
[edit] Spreading the message
Hey y'all, just wanted to offer a suggestion: r/atheism, r/skeptic and r/freethought on reddit.com would all be good places to post about this fundraiser. Tktktk (talk) 17:24, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- It'd be a bit spammy to post "HI REDDIT, GIVE US YOUR MONEY! (you tight bastards!)" --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 19:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- Somebody already has. Peter Monomorium antarcticum 19:46, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Just a thought...
How about a fuck off big picture of Jimmy Wales in the banner? Nothing gets people in the donating mood like Jimbo and his eyes. 77.101.36.30 (talk) 00:08, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- So now we just need a mod to put it up... Peter Monomorium antarcticum 00:34, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Halfway there in only a week?
Awesome. Osaka Sun (talk) 20:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Podcasts?
Excellent70.68.142.98 (talk) 17:29, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] "Various government agencies"
Just curious, what are the "various government agencies" which rationalwiki owes money? Is it taxes, or a copyright thing, or what? 209.158.5.117 (talk) 00:34, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- See RationalWiki:Saloon bar#Let's talk funding and fees (sticky). Wèàšèìòìď
Methinks it is a Weasel 00:40, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- Trent is paying to license the Presidential Seal :-) We can slap it on every page to make us look super official.
Radioactive Misanthrope 00:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- Is there a breakdown of the various fees anywhere and a timeline for payment? I've given all I can spare at the moment but could happily give more later on. Lily Inspirate me. 10:21, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Trent is paying to license the Presidential Seal :-) We can slap it on every page to make us look super official.
[edit] So what now?
We need to raise $500 in three days. Any suggestions? Osaka Sun (talk) 18:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- Actually we need $225.58 as The Cheat has promised to make up the final $250. Lily Inspirate me. 10:50, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Advertisements
We used to have advertisements and that worked well for a while. If there is a desperate shortage of funds we could try that again. Perhaps we could split off the less intellectual parts like those relating to Conservapedia or the Fun section and host them on a separate server with advertisements. Of course working without advertisements is better funding permitting but advertisements work on Liberapedia and Atheism Wiki. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think we should put advertisements up now that the RWF is an incorporated nonprofit.
Acer Blue 17:41, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- Many of us appreciate RW as one of the (relatively few) places on the internet not dominated by advertising. Ŵêâŝêîôîď
Methinks it is a Weasel 17:55, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- You know you want to. Osaka Sun (talk) 18:44, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- Many of us appreciate RW as one of the (relatively few) places on the internet not dominated by advertising. Ŵêâŝêîôîď
- @Proxima: You do realize that Atheism Wiki is hosted by Wikia, which is MediaWiki's backstabbing money-grubbing cousin, right?
Radioactive Misanthrope 18:53, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
We tried ads, it sucked, big time. Marginal amounts of money at a significant cost to usability and credibility. Rather close up shop than go back to that. Tmtoulouse (talk) 23:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- I do seem to remember we had ads for a short time. I think our credibility got shot when one of those ads was for a clairvoyant or astrologist or something. AceModerator 23:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- Islamic dating sites seemed to be about the most prevalent ads from what I remember of those days. Ŵêâŝêîôîď
Methinks it is a Weasel 23:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- The only upshot of that is "intentional irony", adverts just get increasingly intrusive. Already countless forums embed them in posted content (at least for non-logged-in viewers), and if that was tried on a wiki, well, it'd seriously fuck up all the articles. Simply put, we don't have the demographic targeting ability of social networks, which is the only place where online advertising is currently profitable (you think JREF and NCSE are going to pay for advertising slots?) so it would be all of the pain for fuck all of the gain.
bomination 09:17, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
- The only upshot of that is "intentional irony", adverts just get increasingly intrusive. Already countless forums embed them in posted content (at least for non-logged-in viewers), and if that was tried on a wiki, well, it'd seriously fuck up all the articles. Simply put, we don't have the demographic targeting ability of social networks, which is the only place where online advertising is currently profitable (you think JREF and NCSE are going to pay for advertising slots?) so it would be all of the pain for fuck all of the gain.
- Islamic dating sites seemed to be about the most prevalent ads from what I remember of those days. Ŵêâŝêîôîď
[edit] Wait, more money?
It wasn't six months ago we chucked a couple of thousand buck at the site. I thought that was supposed to be for the year. What's the deal with wanting more money now? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 18:43, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- We didn't quiet hit our goal the last time around, but we have on hand enough funds through I think November possibly December too. I rather be raising money now for our expenses a year from now then to wait and try and raise fund when the lights are about ready to be shut off. Having at least a years operating cost on hand seems logical to me. Asking for a few bucks every 6 months doesn't seem like a hardship, particularly since anyone who wants can just ignore it. Also having funds on hand in the event we have to spin up to a larger server with continued traffic increases is another point. We also will still likely need to fork over some cash to the NM AG if we can ever get them to focus for longer than 30 seconds. Tmtoulouse (talk) 23:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Ken jokes at our expense
Ho Ho Ho!img AceModerator 22:02, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, yeah Conservative. Do you hand Andy money to support your posts? How much money have you contributed to CP? Or how much money has Terry made off of CP? Sorry we don't have a sugar daddy. Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 23:16, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Psychology
We failed to reach the goal of 2000$ the last time. What makes you think that we can it reach this time? Our community is good for ca. 1500$ - 1800$, less for the second fundraiser in one year, especially as (like me) thought it to be a once-a-year event. larronsicut fur in nocte 06:09, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- We run a fundraiser, we get enough money for a little less than a years costs. What is the better approach to take? Attempt to raise some more money about the halfway point and ensure that we always have between 6-12 months costs in our bank account? Or should I wait until the money is gone hold a fundraiser and hope we get enough before we are shut down? Tmtoulouse (talk) 06:13, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- I thought fundraising memos were quarterly. Anyway, I have bunged some $ in your direction. Don't spend it all at once.
bomination 09:48, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- I thought fundraising memos were quarterly. Anyway, I have bunged some $ in your direction. Don't spend it all at once.
[edit] Another methods
I havn't PayPall account. Could the WebMoney be accepted?--Mr. B 18:20, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hey, you don't actually need a paypal account to donate, you can use any major credit card, or visa/mastercard debit card and never sign up for a paypal account. At this time we are not looking into changing how we accept donations, we need to keep it simple for our own records. Tmtoulouse (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
- Where did that spike in donations come from exactly? Site traffic is going wild today. Osaka Sun (talk) 19:24, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
[edit] 50%
"We" are way above the 50 percent mark now. I suggest updating the site announcement, because the contradiction is quite funny. By the way, any idea who dropped the big donation?--ZooGuard (talk) 11:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- George Soros, of course! Sophiebecause liberals 12:17, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- Andy Schlafly... larronsicut fur in nocte 12:26, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- You just made my brain hurt. Sophiebecause liberals 12:41, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- Big Pharma.
narchist 12:51, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- Whenever I see "Big Pharma" I think "Git orf moi laand." Sophiebecause liberals 12:53, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

gnostic 13:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- Whenever I see "Big Pharma" I think "Git orf moi laand." Sophiebecause liberals 12:53, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- Big Pharma.
- You just made my brain hurt. Sophiebecause liberals 12:41, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- Andy Schlafly... larronsicut fur in nocte 12:26, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
[edit] So Web 2.0 it hurts...
"...directly effects the global conversation on these issues."
Could have been straight out of Twitter's marketing jargon!
moral
08:38, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
- It is what you get when you make the data analyst write your copy. *shrug* Tmtoulouse (talk) 01:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
[edit] 47%
:) SophieWilder 12:58, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
- Now at 52%
bomination
17:25, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Inconsistent Redness Throughout the Site
The money thermometer is showing different temperatures throughout the site. What's the deal? One page is showing 100%, others are showing randomness and chaos. 54%'s and 33%'s are running amok, burning down our homes and seducing our women folk. So. . . what's the deal? — Unsigned, by: 63.246.245.90 / talk / contribs