2008/11/27 Robert Rohde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Thomas Dalton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And, in fact, wikimediafoundation.org says "nonprofit charitable >> organization". I don't know why people generally say "non-profit" >> instead of "charity", then - charity would be more precise and would >> probably be better perceived. > I agree that the WMF fits the legal definition of a charity, but when > one says "charity" the first thing that comes to my mind are > organizations that take donations (often including food or clothes) > for the primary purpose of redistributing most of them to the needy. > You know, the Red Cross, United Way, Goodwill, food banks, etc. > Obviously the WMF's mission and the use of their income is somewhat > different from that, even though promoting the dissemination of > knowledge is ultimately a charitable purpose. > So at least in my mind calling the WMF a charity feels less precise > and more confusing. Just my two cents. Your reaction may vary. Same in Australia, really. A wider meaning for the word "charity" is common in the UK, though. - d. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
