In the interest of creating *informed* discussion, please note the
publication of Episode 82 of Wikipedia Weekly - an interview with Matt
Halprin.
In this, at timecode 9:15 he is specifically asked about the issue of
the donation+board membership.
2009/8/28 Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com:
In the interest of creating *informed* discussion, please note the
publication of Episode 82 of Wikipedia Weekly - an interview with Matt
Halprin.
In this, at timecode 9:15 he is specifically asked about the issue of
the donation+board membership.
here is the transcript of the question and answer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikipediaWeekly/Wikimania_2009/Halprin
Thanks to Sage Ross for doing this.
-Liam [[witty lama]]
On 8/28/09, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/28 Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com:
In the
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/8/28 Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com:
In the interest of creating *informed* discussion, please note the
publication of Episode 82 of Wikipedia Weekly - an interview with Matt
Halprin.
In this, at timecode
2009/8/28 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/8/28 Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com:
In the interest of creating *informed* discussion, please note the
publication of Episode 82 of Wikipedia Weekly - an interview with
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/8/28 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org: It seems to me that if one is
to assume good faith, the answer is that the
money and the commitment by
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 3:23 AM, Joshua Gay joshua...@gmail.com wrote:
When Matt Halprin is on the board of Wikimedia, he is doing his job for
Omidyar Network.
That's quite an accusation. WMF board members aren't supposed to be paid.
If they're paid by a third party, is that okay?
So,
Hoi.
When I read that people with a seat on the board aren't supposed to be paid,
I hope you mean that they are not paid by the Wikimedia Foundation. Because
the alternative is that all people on the board have to independently
wealthy and if that is the case I am relieved that I only just lost
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.comwrote:
When I read that people with a seat on the board aren't supposed to be
paid,
I hope you mean that they are not paid by the Wikimedia Foundation.
No, what I mean is they aren't supposed to be paid *for being
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
When I read that people with a seat on the board aren't supposed to be
paid,
I hope you mean that they are not paid by the Wikimedia
Thank you very much all of you (Brigitte SB, Ting Chen, Mickael Snow and
others).
To close my participation in this thread I just add three points :
- My question about the wikimedia membership criterion wasn't very
important, but just-to-know ; thanks for your explanations.
- The
2009/8/27 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
2009/8/27 Joshua Gay joshua...@gmail.com:
When Matt Halprin is on the board of Wikimedia, he is doing his job for
Omidyar Network. So, when we read, a statement like:
I'm not familiar with the relevant US law, but in the UK that would be
2009/8/27 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
I'm not convinced Halprin is even employed by the Omidyar Network.
According to the website, he is a partner. Partners aren't employees.
I think partners usually are employees, just ones with a stake in the business.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/8/27 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
I'm not convinced Halprin is even employed by the Omidyar Network.
According to the website, he is a partner. Partners aren't employees.
I think partners usually are
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/8/27 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
I'm not convinced Halprin is even employed by the Omidyar Network.
According to the website, he is a
2009/8/27 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/8/27 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
I'm not convinced Halprin is even employed by the Omidyar Network.
According to the website, he is a partner. Partners aren't employees.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
Partner has different meanings. A partner in a partnership is as you
describe. A partner is a large (often public) company like a bank is
just a title for a high ranking employee. I think we are talking at
cross
2009/8/27 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
I agree that companies often misuse the term partner for people who aren't
actually partners (although I can't think of an example, can you?).
Big banks often do it. I remember reading a news article about Goldman
Sachs announcing its new batch of partners.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Kropotkine_113kropotkine...@free.fr wrote:
I think that a non-used but very efficient
solution would be to share informations before the official report and
to work closely with local chapters ; but this is a more wide problem
and slightly out-of-the-scope of
--- On Thu, 8/27/09, Kropotkine_113 kropotkine...@free.fr wrote:
From: Kropotkine_113 kropotkine...@free.fr
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Omidyar Network Commits $2 Million Grant to
Wikimedia Foundation
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Thursday
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 22:57, James Forresterja...@jdforrester.org wrote:
Oh, and someone told me to do this, but unfortunately I'm not allowed
to say who instructed me so to do.
Must've been The Voices.
___
foundation-l mailing list
...still, I have to acknowledge that money is the root of Evil, and
it's getting harder and harder as these dollar bills start to pile up
where do they go and why...
...the reports get more and more vague, the report items get more and
more broad, and at the end we start to see hundreds of those
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:09 AM, Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com wrote:
...still, I have to acknowledge that money is the root of Evil
Feel free to send all yours to me.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
2009/8/26 Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com:
...still, I have to acknowledge that money is the root of Evil
Sure, if world peace is evil.
By the way, you might want to read up on Wikipedia on that phrase,
where it will undoubtedly tell you that it is the *lust* for money
that is the root of all
Hey,
I've read most of the topic on my blackberry so might have missed some
point but I'm surprised of the reactions.
In my opinion there's only two questions Is OM an organisation close
to WMF and supporting other NPO sharing some of WMF goals ? the
answer is yes. So I don't see the problem in
Hoi,
hear hear !!
Thanks,
Gerard
2009/8/26 Christophe Henner christophe.hen...@gmail.com
Hey,
I've read most of the topic on my blackberry so might have missed some
point but I'm surprised of the reactions.
In my opinion there's only two questions Is OM an organisation close
to WMF
Here's a simple series of questions:
(1) On which boards of directors (either for-profit or non-profit) has Matt
Halprin been newly seated, since 2006?
(2) To which of those organizations has the Omidyar Network made a
significant financial contribution or investment?
(3) What is the result of
2009/8/26 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
2009/8/25 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
How can you have a QA on a topic like this that doesn't even address
the matter than you have sold a seat on the board? Has the WMF
completely lost touch with the community? It should be obvious that
Hi Thomas,
On Aug 26, 2009, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
Those answers don't address the fact that you've just given a seat on
the board to someone that has just given you a big pile of cash. I am
open to being convinced that this is a good thing, but you haven't
this subject with the project communities? How does this appointment
have any impact on the activities within the projects?
This question is equivalent to the question:
How does any appointment to the board have any impact on the
activities within the projects?
isn't it?
... or even
How does
Just few questions to make my opinion.
Has Matt Halprin been designated to the Board by the Nominating Commitee
(NOMCOM) ? This is explicity required if I read correctly this page :
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees/Restructure_Announcement_Q%26A
If he has, when ? Before or
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Kropotkine_113 kropotkine...@free.frwrote:
Just few questions to make my opinion.
Has Matt Halprin been designated to the Board by the Nominating Commitee
(NOMCOM) ? This is explicity required if I read correctly this page :
Hi Thomas,
On Aug 26, 2009, at 2:48 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
Wikimedia is a community driven movement, big decisions should be made
by the community.
Those are undoubtedly interesting assertions. Assuming the second one
is the case (big decisions should be made by
Sebastian Moleski hett schreven:
This may be a heretic question but I'd like to pose it anyway: why
should it be necessary or appropriate for the Foundation to discuss
this subject with the project communities? How does this appointment
have any impact on the activities within the
I just ask few questions. I did not mention conflict of interest nor
community upset in my post. I'm not a high-volume Foundation-l poster
(maybe 1 or 2 posts in three years), but an intensive reader.
About the nominating commitee, in this QA page :
2009/8/26 Sebastian Moleski seb...@gmail.com:
Hi Thomas,
On Aug 26, 2009, at 2:48 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
Wikimedia is a community driven movement, big decisions should be made
by the community.
Those are undoubtedly interesting assertions. Assuming the second one
Hello
[I didn't read the whole thread, apologies if this point has already been made.]
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Those answers don't address the fact that you've just given a seat on
the board to someone that has just given you a big pile of
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Guillaume Paumierguillom@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
It is very common for members of the board of a non-profit
organisation to donate money to support this organisation.
It was my understanding that the appointment was of Matt Halprin, not
the Omidyar Network.
Guillame said:
A board member (or volunteer, or anyone who goes around and asks
someone to donate money to a cause) has some leverage if they can
answer: « I donated $2 million because I think this cause is worthy.
How much will you donate? »
+++
How unfortunate for Matt Halprin. As
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Robert Rohderaro...@gmail.com wrote:
However, in this case, even if we
assume the seat was outright bought for $2M, I don't think there are
I'm not sure why people are behaving as
Hoi,
Gregory, at Wikimania people are REALLY busy with the business of our
organisation and your notion that there might be people that are their
answer you in what you consider a timely fashion is at odds with reality.
Realistically if you get a message in the first place, do not expect
anything
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Robert Rohderaro...@gmail.com wrote:
I hedged my language because I don't believe it is that simple. I do
believe the money and the seat are linked, but I don't believe just
Thats quite fair, however:
anyone could buy a seat for $2M. For example, I doubt Mr.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Gregory Kohsthekoh...@gmail.com wrote:
Guillame said:
I know my name is unpronounceable to anyone who doesn't speak French,
but I would assume copy/pasting isn't that difficult.
A board member (or volunteer, or anyone who goes around and asks
someone to donate
2009/8/26 Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Robert Rohderaro...@gmail.com wrote:
However, in this case, even if we
assume the seat was outright bought for $2M, I don't think there are
2009/8/26 Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Guillaume Paumierguillom@gmail.com
wrote:
[snip]
It is very common for members of the board of a non-profit
organisation to donate money to support this organisation.
It was my understanding that the
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that fits the definition of sell, others
may disagree but it is semantics and is unimportant.
Is it unimportant? We're discussing how this action is perceived as
having bought a seat, so I'd say that that
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Casey Brownli...@caseybrown.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that fits the definition of sell, others
may disagree but it is semantics and is unimportant.
Is it unimportant? We're discussing how
My two cents -
The Board telegraphed this ahead of time, not the particulars
(who/when) but the generalities.
The process is not unusual for other charitable organizations.
There are more community members (active or ex) on the Board than any
other category. There still will be even if all the
Hello Kropotkine_113,
since I am on the NomCom I will answer your questions.
Kropotkine_113 wrote:
Has Matt Halprin been designated to the Board by the Nominating Commitee
(NOMCOM) ? This is explicity required if I read correctly this page :
Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 22:44 +0200, Ting Chen a écrit :
Hello Kropotkine_113,
Hello Ting,
since I am on the NomCom I will answer your questions.
Kropotkine_113 wrote:
Has Matt Halprin been designated to the Board by the Nominating Commitee
(NOMCOM) ? This is explicity required if
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 21:26, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Guillaume Paumierguillom@gmail.com
wrote:
[snip]
It is very common for members of the board of a non-profit
organisation to donate money to support this organisation.
It was my
Kropotkine_113 wrote:
Ok. It would be interesting to explain that more explicitely somewhere
(on meta or on wikimediafoundation's wiki) because It was not so obvious
(or I didn't understain...) when I read the QA page I mentionned.
I agree, we will improve that.
Thank you for all these
..phil...@gmx.de
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Omidyar Network Commits $2 Million Grant to
Wikimedia Foundation
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2009, 3:44 PM
Hello Kropotkine_113,
since I am on the NomCom I will answer your
Kropotkine_113 wrote:
Does he fulfill the Nomitanig Commitee selection criterion : Membership
in the Wikimedia community ?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Nominating_Committee/Selection_criteria#General_needed_traits
Ting already answered the rest of these questions, but I will elaborate
on
Omidyar Network Commits $2 Million Grant to Wikimedia Foundation
SAN FRANCISCO and REDWOOD CITY, Calif., Aug. 25 /PRNewswire/ --
Omidyar Network today announced a grant of up to $2 million over two
years to the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that
operates Wikipedia, one of the
2009/8/25 Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com:
Omidyar Network Commits $2 Million Grant to Wikimedia Foundation
SAN FRANCISCO and REDWOOD CITY, Calif., Aug. 25 /PRNewswire/ --
Omidyar Network today announced a grant of up to $2 million over two
years to the Wikimedia Foundation, the
Omidyar Network Commits $2 Million Grant to Wikimedia Foundation
+++
Ah, yes... the other shoe drops. This is similar to the time when Amazon
invested $10 million in Wikia, Inc., but they insisted on installing Jeffrey
Blackburn from Amazon (
This is good news. It doesn't seem strange to me at all that a major donor
gains a limited voice on the Board, particularly when the donor can offer
expertise and connections in addition to funding. It also serves as a more
plausible explanation for Halprin's appointment than the conspiracy theory
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Gregory Kohsthekoh...@gmail.com wrote:
Omidyar Network Commits $2 Million Grant to Wikimedia Foundation
+++
Ah, yes... the other shoe drops. This is similar to the time when Amazon
invested $10 million in Wikia, Inc., but they insisted on installing
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Nathannawr...@gmail.com wrote:
One thing I'm curious about... Why did this announcement come from Greg?
I simply saw it on PRNewswire and figured folks here would appreciate seeing it.
I have no clue why it wasn't already posted here but the coordination
of
2009/8/25 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/8/25 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
This is good news. It doesn't seem strange to me at all that a major
donor
gains a limited voice on the Board, particularly when the donor
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
membership organizations. Wales was right when he said that the
community
is irrelevant.
When did Jimmy say that? I rather suspect you are taking something he
said out of context...
Many years ago, but my
2009/8/25 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
membership organizations. Wales was right when he said that the
community
is irrelevant.
When did Jimmy say that? I rather suspect you are taking something he
said out of
Hi All,
Little note from Argentina. Both Jay and most members of the board
have been wrapped up in a two hour press conference for Wikimania 2009
over here. It does come down to a timing issue. I expect Michael will
post on Foundation-l about this in the next hour or so. Also as
2009/8/25 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
This is good news. It doesn't seem strange to me at all that a major donor
gains a limited voice on the Board, particularly when the donor can offer
expertise and connections in addition to funding. It also serves as a more
plausible explanation for
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Nathannawr...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
One thing I'm curious about... Why did this announcement come from Greg?
It appears to be an Omidyar press release (not a WMF one) issued
during just the last hour.
Beyond that I won't try and speculate on why the Board didn't
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/8/25 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
This is good news. It doesn't seem strange to me at all that a major
donor
gains a limited voice on the Board, particularly when the donor can offer
expertise and connections
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:57 PM, James Forrester ja...@jdforrester.orgwrote:
2009/8/25 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
membership organizations. Wales was right when he said that the
community
is irrelevant.
2009/8/25 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:57 PM, James Forrester ja...@jdforrester.orgwrote:
2009/8/25 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
membership organizations. Wales was right when he said
2009/8/25 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:57 PM, James Forrester ja...@jdforrester.orgwrote:
2009/8/25 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
membership organizations. Wales was right when he said
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 5:18 PM, James Forrester ja...@jdforrester.orgwrote:
As you already asked me about this off-list, and didn't like my
response, I'm happy to give it here:
Can you prove that I asked you about this off-list?
Sure, but whether or not I believe you, my point is that
I think everyone needs to calm down a little.
Remember that we just got 2 million dollars to further our mission, and that
the board seat appointment (which isn't an unusual practice, at least in my
experience) does nothing to impede our work and the positive impact we can
have. It's the exact
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Steven Wallingsteven.wall...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think everyone needs to calm down a little.
Remember that we just got 2 million dollars to further our mission, and that
the board seat appointment (which isn't an unusual practice, at
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
Occurring on the same day may imply related but it does not, beyond a
reasonable doubt, equal sold. If it did, we'd have a whole lot more
prostitution convictions.
Nevermind:
Anthony said:
* Wales was right when he said that the
** community* *is irrelevant.
*
James Forrester then made a humorous attempt to deflect the possibility that
this might possibly be true.
James, you may benefit from reading (with an open mind, if possible) the
following essay from attorney
*Jan-Bart de Vreede said:
*
the next year will be crucial for us as an
organization in determining our long term strategy. But that process
is shaped by YOU. The tremendous strategy project (details at
http://strategy.wikimedia.org
) started a month ago is making good first steps. The Board of
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Gregory Kohsthekoh...@gmail.com wrote:
*Jan-Bart de Vreede said:
*
the next year will be crucial for us as an
organization in determining our long term strategy. But that process
is shaped by YOU. The tremendous strategy project (details at
2009/8/25 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
How can you have a QA on a topic like this that doesn't even address
the matter than you have sold a seat on the board? Has the WMF
completely lost touch with the community? It should be obvious that
this is going to be a highly controversial
Thank you James.
Some bizarre claims are simply not worthy of serious response. For the
record, the community is far from irrelevant: the community is the most
important thing, full stop.
James Forrester wrote:
2009/8/25 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Thomas
79 matches
Mail list logo
