Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 5:47 PM, phoebe ayers wrote: > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: > >> It's good to see so much interest in this thread. >> >> The purpose of transparency is not feedback. It is valuable in its own >> right. It reduces surprise and supports planning disc

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: > It's good to see so much interest in this thread. > > The purpose of transparency is not feedback. It is valuable in its own > right. > It reduces surprise and supports planning discussions elsewhere in the > movement. > I do agree with thi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

phoebe ayers, 23/04/2013 22:00: [...] I think it is clear that the community can provide valuable feedback, although any feedback just in itself should not be the purpose in its own, right? I guess it might be helpful to figure out what the point of feedback is, exactly. [...] Dariusz is r

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

It's good to see so much interest in this thread. The purpose of transparency is not feedback. It is valuable in its own right. It reduces surprise and supports planning discussions elsewhere in the movement. And any information shared in a lookahead document would be at a high level; not budget

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Exactly. The community is involved in the strategic planning process, and has the opportunity to review the spending and changes over time, both through the visible elements of annual planning and the annual reports. In addition, there is (obviously) pretty robust discussion here when questions ari

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: > from my point of view, it would be really great if there was more feedback > from the community on the FDC proposals, but I also understand that reading > detailed proposals is not necessarily something that many active members > have t

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

from my point of view, it would be really great if there was more feedback from the community on the FDC proposals, but I also understand that reading detailed proposals is not necessarily something that many active members have the necessary time for. I think it is clear that the community can pr

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

On Tuesday, April 23, 2013, Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote: > Steven, > I am actually disappointed to see you bring such an example to back up a > thesis that — that's the impression I'm getting — the community cannot > provide valuable feedback on budget-related matters. > > The experience that I have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Steven, I am actually disappointed to see you bring such an example to back up a thesis that — that's the impression I'm getting — the community cannot provide valuable feedback on budget-related matters. The experience that I have is quite opposite: as far as I am aware, community members ha

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Steven Walling, 23/04/2013 17:58: I fully agree. My team, Editor Engagement Experiments, was one of the few submitted to the FDC for approval.[1] We got almost no substantive questions or comments on the Talk page or mailing lists from community members about our budget. [...] That the FDC pro

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

On Tuesday, April 23, 2013, Nathan wrote: > The necessity of public comment on a detailed budget is overblown. I > don't think the Foundation should dedicate a lot of time or resources > into getting input into the budget development process from members of > the community. This is one area where

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

The necessity of public comment on a detailed budget is overblown. I don't think the Foundation should dedicate a lot of time or resources into getting input into the budget development process from members of the community. This is one area where expertise and the ability to dedicate a substantial

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Hello again, A few comments inline: Leslie Carr writes: > As someone who works for the foundation and has had to deal with > budget issues in engineering (though this is my personal opinion) > the budget process is already incredibly long, drawn out, and stressful. This is a problem that we shou

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:26 AM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote: > Hi Sam, > first of all, let me thank you for your involvement in this—it's > appreciated! Other comments follow in-line. > > >> By the time we see a final-draft plan in April/May, there is already >> little leeway for significant change

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Hi Sam, first of all, let me thank you for your involvement in this—it's appreciated! Other comments follow in-line. By the time we see a final-draft plan in April/May, there is already little leeway for significant change. This probably means that there is something wrong with the process a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Hello Tomasz, We did discuss it in our meeting. The draft plans that the board sees include some details that we would not publish, but we agreed that at a suitably high level we can be more transparent about sharing budget/plan overviews. I need to follow up with Sue this week about what this c

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Tomasz W. Kozlowski, 22/04/2013 21:57: I had a look at the questions that were asked to you during the open meeting in Milan (), but I was unable to find any related to the budget issue. I confirm there was none, I noticed the l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Hi Sam, thanks for the message, I appreciate hearing from a Board member at long last. I agree that it might be a good idea to collect feedback during the year (is there actually any page that could be used for this purpose on Meta?) — but I think that it also needs to be mentioned that it's

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Hello Tomasz, We do need a more active public discussion about the WMF budget. Both before and after it is approved. (The best input to the next year's plan is often input on what is happening in the current year; and continuous feedback that reaches some resolution is more helpful than a burst

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

On 9 April 2013 13:45, Andrew Gray wrote: > Doesn't the community consultation *follow* this? They might follow this, though I am afraid that there is very little point in discussing a budget that has already been aproved. This timeline includes all events up to July 1, the day that the 2013/2014

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

It seems that applying to the FDC for funding periods already begun has been outruled going forward: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Frequently_asked_questions#fundingperiodinthepast. If I read the FAQ correctly. I am not sure if the WMF is giving itself and exception? Best regards, Ben

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

On 9 April 2013 12:45, Andrew Gray wrote: > Doesn't the community consultation *follow* this? > > The WMF works out a budget internally, and the Board vote to approve > it by the end of June. It is released on 1 July, but isn't yet final; > it promptly goes into... > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/w

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

On 9 April 2013 12:22, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: >> Without going into unneccessary detail, let me just ask a simple >> question: are there any particular reasons why the WMF does not want >> community input on the budget, and drafts such a vital document in >> total privacy? > > For the sake o

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Tomasz W. Kozłowski, 09/04/2013 13:18: Hi there, I was reading some fundraising-related pages today, and stumbled upon the planning cycle for the 2013/2014 fiscal year budget at

[Wikimedia-l] Lack of community involvement in WMF budget planning

Hi there, I was reading some fundraising-related pages today, and stumbled upon the planning cycle for the 2013/2014 fiscal year budget at . I noticed that there