Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-23 Thread Dariusz Jemielniak
hi Theo, Actually, no. The board and WMF both have a legal existence and basis. FDC as a committee, albeit a board mandated one sits on the same or equal footing as Langcom or Comcom, slightly above OMGcom, as far as I'm concerned. It has little to no real world existence. Second, the WMF

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-23 Thread Delirium
On 10/23/13 2:08 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: Theo10011, 23/10/2013 00:21: I'm quite surprised to constantly read FDC is somehow representative of the larger community and accountable to them. Almost all the current members were part of chapter leadership and have been quite active within

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-23 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear Dariusz, thank you for your interesting answer, I learned a lot from it. I can imagine that some things will look different when the movement is a little older, with more former board members who would like to serve in the FDC. Kind regards Ziko Am Mittwoch, 23. Oktober 2013 schrieb

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-23 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Delirium, 23/10/2013 13:33: From my perspective as someone not really involved in either the WMF or chapters (or other committees), but just an editor and a community member, I tend to see the WMF as special Note that I wasn't saying it isn't special in some way, I was just saying that

[Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Dariusz Jemielniak
hello, below I'm copying the letter I've just sent to Sue on behalf of the Funds Dissemination Committee, related to the way we see WMF should participate in the FDC process. A little background: In the first year, the WMF submitted part of its annual plan 2012-2013 budget as its proposal to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Risker
Where does the Board Audit Committee fit into this? Risker On 22 October 2013 07:00, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl wrote: hello, below I'm copying the letter I've just sent to Sue on behalf of the Funds Dissemination Committee, related to the way we see WMF should participate in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Craig Franklin cfrank...@halonetwork.net wrote: Hi, I've been aware of this brewing, but can only say that I'm pleased to finally reach the surface. There is no good reason for part of the WMF's budget to be privileged or quarantined from the same scrutiny

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Craig Franklin
Well, this change won't make things perfect - there is still something of a conflict of interest there and obviously the WMF board can choose to ignore the FDC's recommendation altogether and award itself an unreasonably generous budget. However, from last year's experience, where the WMF plan

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Risker
Actually, I'd say that the opportunity for conflict of interest is extremely high, and there's pretty much no way that the FDC can make recommendations on the overall budget (and the very sizeable portion of said budget that is largely dispensed based on their recommendation) without crossing the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Dariusz Jemielniak
hi Nathan, On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: Except that from both a practical and legal perspective the authority of the FDC comes from the WMF; this is the fundamental problem with having it purport to review the Foundation's spending and activity. If the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.plwrote: I have no idea what gave you this impression. The FDC is composed of Wikimedia volunteers and serves as an advisory committee by the Board. The Board itself is not the foundation, neither - it is a body overseeing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Dariusz Jemielniak
hi Nathan, I'm not saying that the problems you're pointing out are non-existent. Rather, I'd say that they are likely unavoidable. I'm not certain about Western Europeans' solidarity anyway - I have serious doubts if any of the Western European FDC members would have any preference for other

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Cornelius Kibelka
Dear Dariusz, dear other FDC members, thanks for your brave and necessary step. Best Cornelius Cornelius Kibelka Twitter: @jaancornelius Mobile:+258-84-4260524 (Vodacom MZ) German number currently offline On 22 October 2013 13:00, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl wrote: hello,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Theo10011
This seems like a preposterous proposition, if not for the distinct recollection that this might have been insinuated by Ms. Gardner in the discussion leading up to the formation of FDC. It still reads like a poorly thought out attempt at some form of a coup or the making of one. This is as bad an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Theo10011, 23/10/2013 00:21: I'm quite surprised to constantly read FDC is somehow representative of the larger community and accountable to them. Almost all the current members were part of chapter leadership and have been quite active within that circle. I suppose this is the same fiction as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

2013-10-22 Thread Theo10011
Hi Nemo I'll get straight to my point here before answering in-line. I see this as yet another move to change or one-up the power structures at play here. WMF created this FDC to evaluate chapter finances, FDC is still limited in what they believe is their scope, WMF still has a great deal of