Switching Petition Platforms
Tristan Copley Smith Sun 30 Oct 2016 10:50AMPublicSeen by 106The #WeAreTwitter petition is currently hosted on the Action Network platform. Change.org is an alternative platform interested in hosting our petition for the campaign's re-launch on Monday (tomorrow).
Here are the pros and cons, as highlighted in the #communications channel on Slack:
Pros for moving to Change.org:
- It is a better known platform with larger community (12m in UK alone)
- They have offered to support our campaign in newsletters emails to their community in UK an look into other countries as well
- There have been issues with the Action Network platform including language support, misleading signature goals, smaller user community
Cons for moving to Change.org:
- Current petition signees will need to re-sign, we may loose some
- Unlike Action Network, Change.org is for-profit and controversial among some activists (see http://bit.ly/2f0Ep8g)
- They use cookies and tracking for advertisements
URGENT: We are relaunching the #WeAreTwitter campaign tomorrow. Should we migrate the petition to Change.org?
proposal by Tristan Copley Smith Closed Sun 30 Oct 2016 8:01PM
Please note: we must decide this by the end of today (Sunday) if we are to have time to migrate to Change.org. Also, our URL can be easily re-routed to a new petition page if we decide to do so.
Pros for moving to Change.org:
• It is a better known platform with larger community (12m in UK alone)
• They have offered to support our campaign in newsletters emails to their community in UK an look into other countries as well
• There have been issues with the Action Network platform including langauge support, misleading signature goals, smaller user community
Cons for moving to Change.org:
• Current petition signees will need to re-sign, we may loose some
• Unlike Action Network, Change.org is for-profit and controvercial among some activists (see http://bit.ly/2f0Ep8g)
• The change could confuse our supporters
Results
| Results | Option | Votes | % of votes cast | % of eligible voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agree | 12 | 60 | 5 |          | |
| Abstain | 4 | 20 | 2 |     | |
| Disagree | 4 | 20 | 2 |  | |
| Block | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Undecided | 230 | 92 |                  |
20 of 250 votes cast (8% participation)
Katharina Simon
Sun 30 Oct 2016 11:01AM
Indigo oder betterplace would be better choices
Johnny Haeusler
Sun 30 Oct 2016 11:14AM
This might be the last chance to switch platforms and I think we neeed the largest partners we can get. They might deal with ad partners, yes. But so does Twitter.
Katharina SimonSun 30 Oct 2016 11:27AM
Indigo oder betterplace would be better choices
Eugenia SiaperaSun 30 Oct 2016 2:44PM
I am going with the flow here, it's important to gain traction at this stage, though I am not a great fan of change.org
Tom McDonough
Sun 30 Oct 2016 3:23PM
The database of petition signers is our most important asset and most remain independent.
I don't know the backend of either Change or ActionNetwork but keeping the database where it is seems best.
Danny SpitzbergSun 30 Oct 2016 3:31PM
Change.org goes against an "Internet of Ownership." They get us attention, but they own our data and sell it for profit. But platform choice aside, How might 10-100k signatures help us? What exact goal/outcome do we want? Can we clarify that first?
Kirsten LambertsenSun 30 Oct 2016 3:59PM
It's hard for me to believe that we aren't allowed to collect the email addresses of our petition signers with Change.org. Is that really true? Do we have to choose? Can we keep both and just use different page paths for each?
Nathan SchneiderSun 30 Oct 2016 4:42PM
I've created a sample list at Change.org.It doesn't appear to have additional features compared to AN—for instance, language support. You can't edit the post-signing page. The only advantage is maybe getting help from the Change.org company.
Daniel BrandesSun 30 Oct 2016 6:26PM
Open for that, but starting from zero could be risky. General public could perceive the movement as fragmented and competing