2009/7/21 Samuel Klein <[email protected]>: > (speaking of which, engaging public grants discussions is a > good idea to bring up during planning -- since some of the most active > community work in support of grants happened when community members found > out about, and were excited by, a potential NEH proposal back in '04... > before a barrier to participation was thrown up.)
An interesting framing. ;-) I agree that a discussion about when grants make sense, and how to effectively apply for them and execute them, is important. I don't think there are any easy answers. The NEH grant, as you may recall, was unsuccessful, and WMF has been successful at actually obtaining significant grant support only recently. And obtaining a grant is only a small part of the work; you actually have to be able to meet your obligations and report on your progress according to the grant-givers' requirements, which vary. For restricted support, you have to make sure that the grants you apply for are things that make sense as organizational priorities. We used community input in developing the Ford multimedia upload proposal - specifically, I created http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Case_for_Commons and invited public feedback in a number of places, which was helpful for the core section of the proposal. In general, I think community participation is great for the "meaty" pieces of a proposal, about the substance of the work or the justifications for it, while externalizing the knowledge about the procedural requirements of various foundations seems potentially wasteful. If you can point to successful relevant collaborations inside and outside WMF, that would be a good start in further developing our knowledge base. -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
