On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On 31 August 2011 17:02, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
I mean that was not negotiable the choice to have grant
agreement/fundraising agreement.
Grant agreement have been considered mandatory without any
On 1 September 2011 09:45, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
You are from WMIT, yes? The tracking chart says there have been legal
issues with transfering half your revenue from the last fundraiser to
the WMF. Until those are resolved, there is no way the WMF could enter
into another
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Arne Klempert
klempert.li...@gmail.com wrote:
We did raise the bar for chapters to participate in the fundraiser as
payment processors. However, IMO the board's guidance provides enough
flexibility to let more chapters than just WMDE participate in 2011.
But
On 31 August 2011 09:34, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
I asked if the proposal of grant agreement was negotiable and the
answer has been no!
The talk page of the grant agreement on internal-wiki would seem to
disagree with you. It is full of people pointing out problems or room
for
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On 31 August 2011 09:34, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
I asked if the proposal of grant agreement was negotiable and the
answer has been no!
The talk page of the grant agreement on internal-wiki would
On 31 August 2011 17:02, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
I mean that was not negotiable the choice to have grant
agreement/fundraising agreement.
Grant agreement have been considered mandatory without any further discussion.
Ah, I misunderstood. Sorry. I believe Sue has stated in no
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
On 31 August 2011 17:02, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
I mean that was not negotiable the choice to have grant
agreement/fundraising agreement.
Grant agreement have been considered mandatory without
On 31 August 2011 22:20, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Thomas Dalton
thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
On 31 August 2011 17:02, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
I mean that was not negotiable the choice to have grant
agreement/fundraising
On 08/29/11 1:55 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
John is unfortunately right. The (currently not publicly available as I
understand) draft includes clauses that require every chapter that receives
a grant to abide all US law, including but not exclusively US anti terrorism
laws and trade bans (unless a
On 08/29/11 3:51 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
What I am saying is that Foundation will have to check every program
of every chapter, no matter if it would give one large or per-program
grants. And it will have to do no matter if chapters think that it is
their problem.
What would WMF do:
* If
2011/8/30 Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 1:04 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
But then, central planning is famous for its notable successes in economics.
Ok, but is WMF an economic institution?
As a neutral observer (i.e. not a member of any chapter)
On 30 August 2011 10:11, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 1:04 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
But then, central planning is famous for its notable successes in economics.
Ok, but is WMF an economic institution?
I was hoping to make a more general
2011/8/30 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net
On 08/29/11 1:55 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
It may be a logical consequence for the WMF giving out these grants (I
don't
know but wouldn't be surprised if i.e. Ford Foundation has similar
requirements), but it clearly is a nasty side effect of the
On 30 August 2011 10:44, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
2011/8/30 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net
On 08/29/11 1:55 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
It may be a logical consequence for the WMF giving out these grants (I
don't
know but wouldn't be surprised if i.e. Ford Foundation
Hi Anne,
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
It does strike me as odd that, given the legendary openness of
Wikimedia-related projects and activities, at least the basic provisions of
the chapter agreement isn't widely accessible. It would be very
demotivating
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
It does strike me as odd that, given the legendary openness of
Wikimedia-related projects and activities, at least the basic provisions of
the chapter agreement isn't widely accessible. It would be very
demotivating
for
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Sebastian Moleski i...@sebmol.me wrote:
Hi Anne,
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
It does strike me as odd that, given the legendary openness of
Wikimedia-related projects and activities, at least the basic provisions
of
On 30 August 2011 11:09, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
It does strike me as odd that, given the legendary openness of
Wikimedia-related projects and activities, at least the basic provisions
of
the chapter
Nathan wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Sebastian Moleski i...@sebmol.me wrote:
Just for clarification: did you actually look for these agreements or are
you just assuming they aren't available publicly?
The standard template for the agreement is published here:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
Because although it is claimed differently (and although Thomas seems to
hope differently) the interpretation by the staff is clearly that no chapter
except WMDE should fundraise - no matter how hard they work to
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
..
Thanks, Bence. Given that the document that is creating so much fuss is
*not* publicly available, and there are many references to current
agreements without links to the version that particular chapter signed or
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Arne Klempert klempert.li...@gmail.com wrote:
...
We did raise the bar for chapters to participate in the fundraiser as
payment processors. However, IMO the board's guidance provides enough
flexibility to let more chapters than just WMDE participate in 2011.
On 30 August 2011 19:35, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
..
Thanks, Bence. Given that the document that is creating so much fuss is
*not* publicly available, and there are many references to current
agreements
On 08/30/11 4:35 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
It is a draft. A few problems were communicated privately nine days
ago from WMAU, and from other chapters around the same time.
I would like an ETA from the WMF on a public version for comment.
This would help.
Ray
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
I still see it as a matter of outlook when you say, WMF is a U.S. nonprofit
and must (at minimum) operate under the U.S. rules, so is a German, French
or a Swiss nonprofit, they must operate under the rules of their own
John is unfortunately right. The (currently not publicly available as I
understand) draft includes clauses that require every chapter that receives
a grant to abide all US law, including but not exclusively US anti terrorism
laws and trade bans (unless a court has ruled that... etc). This puts
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 10:55, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
John is unfortunately right. The (currently not publicly available as I
understand) draft includes clauses that require every chapter that receives
a grant to abide all US law, including but not exclusively US anti
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 8:04 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
..
I don't see that as chapters' problem, but Foundation's. Chapters
should present what do they want to do and if Foundation doesn't
complain, then to do that. If WMF thinks that it is feasible to build
infrastructure
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:24, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 8:04 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see that as chapters' problem, but Foundation's. Chapters
should present what do they want to do and if Foundation doesn't
complain, then to do
On 29 August 2011 11:51, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
That will make significant overload in WMF's processing capabilities.
Can't wait to see how WMF would analyze programs of any larger
chapter; and chapters tend to be larger and larger. Ultimately, that
will lead into even more
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 13:04, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
But then, central planning is famous for its notable successes in economics.
Fortunately, we wouldn't have to eat passers to make it clear how the
central planning is economically successful.
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 1:04 AM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com
wrote:
On 8/28/2011 9:00 PM, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Nathannawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Which activities are these?
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 13:18, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 13:04, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
But then, central planning is famous for its notable successes in economics.
Fortunately, we wouldn't have to eat passers to make it clear how the
central
On 08/29/11 11:47 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 13:18, Milos Rancicmill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 13:04, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
But then, central planning is famous for its notable successes in economics.
Fortunately, we wouldn't have to eat
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 03:03, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
On 08/29/11 11:47 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
Sparrows [1], but Serbian Wikipedia article sparrow leads to
passer and I am bad in flora and fauna terminology.
Eating sparrows is one of the commons issues during the first
On 8/28/2011 10:04 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Michael Snowwikipe...@frontier.com wrote:
On 8/28/2011 9:00 PM, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Nathannawr...@gmail.comwrote:
Which activities are these?
Copyright and internet law
2011/8/28 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
If the question is one of minimum standards of accountability the
WMF's first obligation would be to publish the standards which it
requires, presumably consistent with
Has it been worked out how many chapters will be affected by this
change? Of those that will be excluded this year (if any decisions on
that have been made or are anticipated), how many can expect to meet
the requirements for participation next year? Figuring this out may
have been part of the
On 28 August 2011 04:47, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/8/28 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net
wrote:
If the question is one of minimum standards of accountability the
WMF's first obligation
On 28.08.2011 16:46, Risker wrote:
On 28 August 2011 04:47, rupert THURNERrupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/8/28 Delphine Ménardnotafi...@gmail.com:
+1.
in switzerland we feel that a good target is to get 1 CHF per user and
year as donation. not having a better means of calculating the
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 16:46, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 August 2011 04:47, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/8/28 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net
wrote:
If the question is one of
Hi Risker
I would like to ask your opinion on WMF's stewardship of the money. The
Foundation has fulfilled its legal obligation as a non-profit but as a
community member from english wikipedia, do you feel it has been accountable
to you or spent it on worthwhile activities for the community? the
On 28 August 2011 14:40, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Has it been worked out how many chapters will be affected by this
change?
All except WMDE.
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On 28 August 2011 18:07, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 August 2011 14:40, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Has it been worked out how many chapters will be affected by this
change?
All except WMDE.
That depends on what you mean by affected, really. I don't think it
will be
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
See now, this is the kind of thinking that raises a lot of questions about
chapters receiving the very large amounts of money that many got the last
time around. In the real world, charities determine what their objectives
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Risker
I would like to ask your opinion on WMF's stewardship of the money. The
Foundation has fulfilled its legal obligation as a non-profit but as a
community member from english wikipedia, do you feel it has been
On 28.08.2011 21:00, Nathan wrote:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Ilario Valdellivalde...@gmail.com wrote:
This is incorrect because to receive tax exemption a person doesn't need
to have a receipt.
At least for Switzerland the donor can only indicate to have donate an
amount to one
On 28.08.2011 21:00, Nathan wrote:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Ilario Valdellivalde...@gmail.com wrote:
This is incorrect because to receive tax exemption a person doesn't need
to have a receipt.
At least for Switzerland the donor can only indicate to have donate an
amount to one
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Risker
I would like to ask your opinion on WMF's stewardship of the money. The
Foundation has fulfilled its legal obligation as a non-profit but as a
*That depends on what you mean by affected, really. I don't think it
will be just WMDE participating in the fundraiser. The WMF has said that it
intends to abide by existing agreements, which several chapters had signed
before Wikimania.
*
AFAIK, yes. Only WMDE will run fundraising. All
2011/8/28 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
See now, this is the kind of thinking that raises a lot of questions
about
chapters receiving the very large amounts of money that many got the last
time around. In the real
On 08/28/11 12:17 PM, Nathan wrote:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Theo10011de10...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Risker
I would like to ask your opinion on WMF's stewardship of the money. The
Foundation has fulfilled its legal obligation as a non-profit but as a
community member from english
Theo writes:
Second, it might be some form of elitist outlook if you think accountability
standards for US Non-profits are more transparent and fiscally responsible
than say somewhere in EU like Germany, France or the Switzerland. I assure
you, they are existent, not-minimal and more
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
Bearing that in mind, one of the concerns that came to my mind even then was
that many of them did not make it explicitly clear that XX percent of the
donation was going to and independent local chapter. There was also a
On 28 August 2011 21:56, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote:
*That depends on what you mean by affected, really. I don't think it
will be just WMDE participating in the fundraiser. The WMF has said that it
intends to abide by existing agreements, which several chapters had signed
before
On 28.08.2011 23:47, Mike Godwin wrote:
Theo writes:
Second, it might be some form of elitist outlook if you think accountability
standards for US Non-profits are more transparent and fiscally responsible
than say somewhere in EU like Germany, France or the Switzerland. I assure
you, they
Several points in reply to Theo:
1) You don't need to argue the value of having chapters around the world. No
one debating that. It's accepted that effective global outreach requires
effective local partners, and that local chapters are the way to achieve the
best results. I think its generally
On 29 August 2011 00:29, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Which other criteria are so onerous that folks are reacting
like the letter indicts the entire system of chapters?
Because that's its effect: The entire system of chapters, except
WMDE, is hereby recentralised. Thanks for your hard
On 08/28/11 2:47 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
Theo writes:
Second, it might be some form of elitist outlook if you think accountability
standards for US Non-profits are more transparent and fiscally responsible
than say somewhere in EU like Germany, France or the Switzerland. I assure
you, they are
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 7:34 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 August 2011 00:29, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Which other criteria are so onerous that folks are reacting
like the letter indicts the entire system of chapters?
Because that's its effect: The entire system
Hi Mike
I was merely pointing out from what I have seen from some of the other EU
chapters. I know as Non-profits they are obligated to comply with local
restrictions, whether those restriction are lax or stringent in comparison
is a matter of opinion but they do exist, is my point. I believe the
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Mike
I was merely pointing out from what I have seen from some of the other EU
chapters. I know as Non-profits they are obligated to comply with local
restrictions, whether those restriction are lax or stringent in
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.comwrote:
On 8/29/11 1:45 AM, Nathan wrote:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 7:34 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 August 2011 00:29, Nathannawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Which other criteria are so onerous that folks
In line replies to Nathan.
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 4:59 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Several points in reply to Theo:
1) You don't need to argue the value of having chapters around the world.
No
one debating that. It's accepted that effective global outreach requires
effective local
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 5:24 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Mike
I was merely pointing out from what I have seen from some of the other EU
chapters. I know as Non-profits they are obligated to comply with local
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
If the WMF plans for grants to be the interim method of funding for
developing chapters (aside from that raised independently by the chapters
themselves) then I expect that they will tweak the process to account for
the specific
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Mike
I was merely pointing out from what I have seen from some of the other EU
chapters. I know as Non-profits they are obligated to comply with local
Few last points before I duck out of this conversation for awhile...
There are international accounting standards (see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Accounting_Standards_Board). It's
not necessary that all organizations follow them to the letter, obviously,
because not all nations
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 11:15 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
You're strawman is alive.
If the chapters are funded by the WMF, non-US chapters need to abide by US
law.
If all of the fundraising money goes to the WMF, who then distributes
it to chapters via grants, all chapters
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Which activities are these?
Copyright and internet law lobbying.
--vvv
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On 8/28/2011 9:00 PM, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Nathannawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Which activities are these?
Copyright and internet law lobbying.
This is incorrect. The foundation can engage in lobbying under US
regulations if it wishes. Restrictions on lobbying by
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com wrote:
On 8/28/2011 9:00 PM, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Nathannawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Which activities are these?
Copyright and internet law lobbying.
This is incorrect.
Michael,
Have you
2011/8/11 Jimmy Walesjwa...@wikia-inc.com
On 8/10/11 8:51 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
I don't think chapters are being cut off I think they are being
centralized. Centralization, not lack of funding, is what I believe
will make chapters ineffective.
Chapters are not being centralized.
On 08/26/11 2:26 PM, Nathan wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Lodewijklodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
Hi Jimmy,
There are several side effects to the idea of not allowing chapters at all
to fundraise (I note that boardmembers and staff members have a different
take on this, so I'll
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
If the question is one of minimum standards of accountability the
WMF's first obligation would be to publish the standards which it
requires, presumably consistent with IFRS. Chapters incorporated within
particular
2011/8/28 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com:
I'm still baffled at the Wikimedia Foundation wanting to go against
what other international organisations are doing, ie. they fundraise
locally.
Is that what the WMF wants? I know it's what Sue said the plan was,
but then Ting clarified that no
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
Hi Jimmy,
There are several side effects to the idea of not allowing chapters at all
to fundraise (I note that boardmembers and staff members have a
On 08/27/11 4:42 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
2011/8/28 Delphine Ménardnotafi...@gmail.com:
I'm still baffled at the Wikimedia Foundation wanting to go against
what other international organisations are doing, ie. they fundraise
locally.
Is that what the WMF wants? I know it's what Sue said the
On 08/27/11 4:34 PM, Delphine Ménard wrote:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Ray Saintongesainto...@telus.net wrote:
If it were only the chapters themselves at stake (as is the case when
they raise funds independently), then they could get money first and
organization second. But the WMF
On 28 August 2011 01:19, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
If Sue and Ting are so much at odds, maybe the rest of us should duck.
I think it was a misunderstanding on Sue's part, rather than any
actual disagreement.
___
foundation-l mailing
Hi Jimmy,
There are several side effects to the idea of not allowing chapters at all
to fundraise (I note that boardmembers and staff members have a different
take on this, so I'll keep it general - keeping in mind there are many other
aspects to be considered, such as transparancy. However, imho
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
Hi Jimmy,
There are several side effects to the idea of not allowing chapters at all
to fundraise (I note that boardmembers and staff members have a different
take on this, so I'll keep it general - keeping in mind
Hoi,
There is fundraising together and there is fundraising perse. What is at
issue is that chapters are and have always been expected to disclose their
activities, providing financial statements. They are expected to be
accountable and many chapters have largely not been accountable.
The
Basics:
- WMF is a US charity. Funds collected by, or through its website (even
if legally collected by affiliated organizations) will be exposed to
US-style scrutiny and need to be able to withstand that for the reputation
of the movement as a whole.
- Wikimedia is a worldwide
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.comwrote:
On 8/11/2011 7:08 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
Anyway, thanks for raising the importance of decentralization. The
Board agrees: there's a reason it was first in our list of principles.
To my mind decentralization is
rom: phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 8:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Michael Snow wikipe
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
rom: phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 8:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l
Perhaps we might reflect on all the mistakes made by far older global
NPOs - the Catholic Church and all the younger proselytizing churches
are good examples.The mission has always been the dissemination of
knowledge (of a specific sort), so it has experiences that might be
helpful - what not
You are right! TYPO!
On 8/10/11 6:14 PM, Delphine Ménard wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Jimmy Walesjwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
It would be, if that's what it were about. But I can say with
confidence that at the board meeting, no one spoke about any ideas even
remotely similar to
On 8/10/11 7:22 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
As for the rest I encourage you to exercise your
moral duty by helping the chapters fulfill the reporting
requirements, implement the financial controls, and operate
transparently. You have been through this all before. You were the
chairman
On 8/10/11 8:51 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
I don't think chapters are being cut off I think they are being
centralized. Centralization, not lack of funding, is what I believe
will make chapters ineffective.
Chapters are not being centralized. I don't know how I can be more clear.
The
On 8/10/11 8:56 PM, Kirill Lokshin wrote:
Perhaps I'm missing something, but where has it been suggested that chapters
would not remain free to raise funds independently of the WMF? My
impression was that the change being discussed here would merely remove
participation in the WMF fundraiser
I don't think chapters are being cut off I think they are being
centralized. Centralization, not lack of funding, is what I believe will
make chapters ineffective. Frankly, I think cutting off their funding would
be less detrimental (although still not a good thing) to the chapter's
From: Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 7:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
On 8/10/11 7:22 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
As for the rest I
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 10:46 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 August 2011 18:29, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 August 2011 08:18, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 August 2011 05:13, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com
wrote:
This is all very true, and
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 14:53, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
On 8/10/11 8:56 PM, Kirill Lokshin wrote:
Perhaps I'm missing something, but where has it been suggested that chapters
would not remain free to raise funds independently of the WMF? My
impression was that the change being
On 8/11/2011 7:08 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
Anyway, thanks for raising the importance of decentralization. The
Board agrees: there's a reason it was first in our list of principles.
To my mind decentralization is important raises a whole bunch of
other important questions: is decentralization
On 8/9/11 4:46 PM, Kirill Lokshin wrote:
2011/8/9 Delphine Ménardnotafi...@gmail.com
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Kirill Lokshinkirill.loks...@gmail.com
wrote:
Well, let's be clear here: in what sense are the chapters participating
in
the fundraiser, rather than merely being its
Just I have to say Amen to you, Anthere. I see your point.
In addition, chapters need some time to make his job, that is, to involve
relevant people, to create a local structure that engages people to the real
benefits for an enterprise, a council, an academic institution with free
knowledge.
On 8/9/11 1:46 PM, David Gerard wrote:
(I don't think that is the intent - apparently WMF feels like it can
mess people around and still get 100% from them. I do consider that
the problems really haven't been considered.)
I don't think the WMF thinks that they can mess people around at all,
1 - 100 of 154 matches
Mail list logo
