What about making the second link accessible only to donators (if you don't donate, you don't get all those nifty multi-local options)? Or would that kill the perk for the folks uploading?
I guess the question is what's more important: getting more people TO donate or giving more perks to the people who were going to donate anyways.
I'm happy with what I have, I don't feel this site has to do more for me, as a donator. Not to keep me donating every year and not to keep me feeling like I'm getting my money's worth (so to speak). But if the goal is to get more money coming in, then I'm not the kind of donator that new and improved perks should be targetting because a-m-v.org already HAS my money anyways.
Maybe the goal should be to get people to
increase their donations, not necessarily increase the number of donators. It's a lot easier to get someone already willing to donate to donate a little more, than to get someone who wasn't going to donate at all to fork over their cash. For instance, if a double link scenario was implemented, arrange it so that a certain donation amount is required before that perk becomes available. It would put the cost of the perk squarely on the shoulders of those taking advantage of it, for one thing, and offer pretty clear evidence for how many people actually were interested enough in that as a perk to support it.
Don't implement perks only a handful of people care about if the point is to increase donations.
