Creating a new thread because the other is apparently running in circles
now.
phoebe ayers, 14/03/2013 21:38:
Yes. In an university context, which is what I'm most familiar with (and
where endowments are very common in the U.S.), there is often a specific
endowment campaign to plan for and
Nemo, can you explain what the benefits would be? What I see is a
massive future headache over bureaucracy and roles, and no tangible
benefit to separating a Trust from the actual ownership and
management of the Wikimedia projects. I read the meta page, but don't
see an outline of why this would
Nathan skrev 2013-03-15 15:24:
no tangible
benefit to separating a Trust from the actual ownership and
management of the Wikimedia projects. I read the meta page, but don't
see an outline of why this would be a good idea.
~Nathan
From an operative point of view it is no big difference it is
Thanks Anders. Perhaps what I'm not understanding is what difference
having a separate, distinct Trust would make to your nightmare
scenario. Since the Wikimedia Trust that Nemo proposed wouldn't own or
control any Wikimedia property (the websites, the servers, the
trademarks), I'm still not
A Trust that only could be used for elementary running of servers, would
secure accesablity of content free of charge, independent of any strange
action by WMF, The Board, the editor community or vandals.
The Trust should not own anything but a huge Fund, and how it will be
legally
Le 2013-03-15 15:14, Federico Leva (Nemo) a écrit :
Creating a new thread because the other is apparently running in
circles now.
phoebe ayers, 14/03/2013 21:38:
Yes. In an university context, which is what I'm most familiar with
(and
where endowments are very common in the U.S.), there is
