Hi everyone, I send this mail as a representative of Wikimedia France.
Wikimedia France acknowledges and agrees with the FDC decision. The arguments provided with the decision makes sense to us. Wikimedia France will submit, if possible, a request for the round 2. On behalf of Wikiemdia France board, Christophe HENNER | Membre du Conseil d'Administration ------------------------------------------------------------------- › Mail : [email protected] › Mobile : +33(0)6 29 35 65 94 › Tel : +33(0)5 62 89 12 01 › Twitter : @Wikimedia_Fr ----------------------------------------------------- Wikimédia France | Association pour le libre partage de la connaissance | Visitez notre blog http://blog.wikimedia.fr On 15 November 2012 21:29, Lodewijk <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dariusz, > > it would probably be helpful if it were indicated when the 120% cap was > used as the sole reason to reduce the amount. Could you still add that to > the arguments? That would make it much more insightful. I was personally > under the impression the maximum was 150% by the way, but that information > might have been outdated. Then it is at least clear that a technicality is > the sole cause for your rejection of part of their budget (and could > potentially form ground for the chapter to ask the board to make an > exception - it would be quite different if the reasons were because you > didn't trust them with the money etc). > > But for example in the case of Wikimedia France I guess the 120% cap was > not the reason you only allocated 10% of the amount they requested. I find > the reasoning in their case quite poor for such a major decision which > could potentially mean that people get fired and the organization has to > scale down significantly. I'm confident that you had very good and in depth > discussions about this, but this is not reflected in the recommendation in > their specific case. I guess this might be the case for a few more > applications. > > I don't want to go to a specific case here, but just want to illustrate why > I feel the arguments are poorly presented. Since you did go into such great > discussion, I feel it would be a waste of your efforts if the arguments are > so shallow. > > I am still hopeful you will change your mind, and add more reasoning to the > cases. > > Kind regards, > > Lodewijk > > 2012/11/15 Dariusz Jemielniak <[email protected]> > >> hi Lodewijk, >> >> first, this is basically a recommendation for the Board, not the final >> allocation. However, regarding your specific question: We are not planning >> on providing further detailed responses - we have already offered a great >> many details in our overall recommendations in terms of process and >> methodology. >> >> Per the fact that some organizations "got so much less than they >> requested": please, keep in mind that there was a suggested 120% maximum >> budget growth capping, and also that WCA membership fees have been deducted >> for everyone (but not other WCA-related costs), as WCA may apply for FDC >> funding directly (or choose a different model, once it is decided, and the >> organization incorporated). >> >> Also, our recommendations make it very clear that smaller entities, which >> were making significant leaps in maturity tended to get most of what they >> asked for, while entities which are medium to large, staffed and already on >> a clear growth path, were looked at with even greater rigor in terms of >> sustainable and appropriate plans (also because of the budget sizes). Small >> entities are often going from no/part-time staff to a full-staff position, >> which can increase the budget (as compared to the previous year) >> significantly, but cannot be avoided. Larger entities can grow more >> harmoniously. >> >> best, >> >> dariusz >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Lodewijk <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> From the arguments, I had a hard time to understand why some >>> organizations got so much less than they requested, and some got every >>> single dollar. I assume more detailed arguments will follow? >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Lodewijk >>> >>> >>> 2012/11/15 Jan-Bart de Vreede <[email protected]> >>> >>>> Hi Everyone >>>> >>>> Rather than repeat everything I would like to point you to a blog post >>>> created earlier today. >>>> >>>> >>>> http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/11/15/fdc-process-milestone-sharing-wikimedia-movement-funds/ >>>> >>>> I do want to take the opportunity to once again thank all those involved >>>> in this first round, including all the participating chapters. As expressed >>>> earlier: this is the future of our funds dissemination and we will refine >>>> the process, but this first round has exceeded my expectations on all >>>> levels. Thanks everyone! >>>> >>>> Jan-Bart >>>> (who now goes digging in the attic for some barn stars....) >>>> >>>> >>>> On 15 Nov 2012, at 19:38, Dariusz Jemielniak <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> > From: Dariusz Jemielniak <[email protected]> >>>> > Date: Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:25 PM >>>> > Subject: FDC recommendations on funds allocation, Round 1, 2012-13 >>>> > To: [email protected] >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > The inaugural Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) is pleased to >>>> announce >>>> > recommendations [1] on Round 1 of funds allocations for the year >>>> 2012-13. >>>> > The WMF Board of Trustees will make a decision on these >>>> recommendations by >>>> > December 15, 2012. >>>> > >>>> > The FDC received proposals from 12 movement entities for Round 1 for a >>>> > total requested amount of 10.4 million USD. These proposals were from >>>> 11 >>>> > Wikimedia chapters and the Wikimedia Foundation. Three proposals were >>>> > received after the deadline of 1 October had passed, but the FDC >>>> decided >>>> > that since it was the first time for the process, the late proposals >>>> would >>>> > be accepted and discussed. Since the proposal deadline, the FDC and FDC >>>> > support staff have spent many hours reviewing and assessing these >>>> proposals >>>> > to determine a set of allocations that would best support movement >>>> goals. >>>> > This assessment included a 4-day in-person deliberation session in San >>>> > Francisco over the period October 28-31, where the FDC members >>>> discussed >>>> > the proposals in depth and determined allocation amounts for each >>>> applying >>>> > entity. >>>> > >>>> > The FDC recognizes that this is not a perfect process, and that the >>>> process >>>> > and the outcome will improve over time as we learn more about what >>>> works in >>>> > the movement and what drives impact. We invite the community to provide >>>> > overall feedback on these recommendations on the talk page for these >>>> > recommendations [2] and to provide feedback about the FDC process >>>> on-wiki >>>> > to the Ombudsperson [3], who will collect this feedback and use it in >>>> our >>>> > continuous improvement process. For formal complaints about the >>>> > recommendations, there is a separate process, outlined below. >>>> > >>>> > If any entity has a complaint about the FDC's recommendation, it >>>> should be >>>> > submitted by 23:59 UTC on 22 November 2012 in accordance with the >>>> complaint >>>> > process outlined in the Framework for the Creation and Initial >>>> Operation of >>>> > the FDC [4]: >>>> > >>>> > - The complaint should be in the form of a 500-or-fewer word summary >>>> > directed to the two non-voting WMF Board representatives on the FDC >>>> > (Jan-Bart and Patricio) >>>> > - The complaint should be submitted on-wiki, through the FDC portal >>>> page >>>> > designated for this purpose [5] >>>> > - These board representatives will present the complaint to the WMF >>>> > Board at the same time it considers the FDC recommendation. >>>> > - Formal complaints can be submitted only by the Board Chair of a >>>> > funding-seeking entity. >>>> > - Formal complaints must be filed within seven days of the >>>> submission of >>>> > the FDC slate of recommendations to the WMF Board (by end of day UTC >>>> > November 22) >>>> > - Any planned or approved disbursements to the organization filing a >>>> > complaint will be put on hold until the complaint is resolved. >>>> > - If the WMF Board's consideration of the complaint results in an >>>> > amendment of the FDC's recommendations (which is expected only in >>>> > extraordinary circumstances), the WMF Board may choose to release >>>> extra >>>> > funds from the WMF reserves to provide additional funds not >>>> allocated by >>>> > the FDC's initial recommendation. >>>> > - Other members of the WMF Board may participate in the >>>> investigation if >>>> > approved by the Chair of the WMF Board. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > on behalf of the FDC >>>> > >>>> > Dariusz Jemielniak (Chair) >>>> > >>>> > [1] >>>> > >>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2012-2013_round1 >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > [2] >>>> > >>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2012-2013_round1 >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > [3] >>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Appeals_regarding_FDC_process >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > [4] >>>> > >>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Framework_for_the_Creation_and_Initial_Operation_of_the_FDC#Complaint_submission_process >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > [5] >>>> > >>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Complaints_regarding_FDC_recommendations_to_the_board >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > >>>> > __________________________ >>>> > dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak >>>> > profesor zarządzania >>>> > kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego >>>> > i centrum badawczego CROW >>>> > Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego >>>> > http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list >>>> > [email protected] >>>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> __________________________ >> dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak >> profesor zarządzania >> kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego >> i centrum badawczego CROW >> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego >> http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl >> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
