On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 12:50 PM,
Rupert wrote:
as food
>
> > for thought, FIFA has a staff of 300. there are 250 million people
> > playing association football worldwide.
> >
> > best,
> > rupert
> >
> >
>
--
I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove with that example. During
the time
I'm thinking similarly in terms of distributing tasks broadly among an
array of Wikimedia affiliates instead of concentrating so many of them in a
single entity. Recent events have highlighted the systemic problems that
happen when WMF takes a stance against its volunteer communities (such as
with
ha, i read the thread and i did not notice the core question :) lets
start from the annual plan then:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2015-16
there are 280 persons working for the WMF, all departments are
growing. money given to somebody else is shrinking below 10%
Hoi,
I totally agree that more money spend on Wikipedia is where we may be at
one end of the law of diminishing returns. However, that is Wikipedia. We
ask money for the Wikimedia Foundation and it has neglected a wide area of
projects where additional money will make a marked improvement.
As far
> On the general topic, the restricted grants received by the WMF have a
> beneficial effect that we could wish extended throughout its operations:
> because it is responsible to the grantor for producing the results demanded
> under the terms of the grant, the outcomes are much more likely to be
>
