SJ, > presuming to represent others - is not very helpful at all.
You can plainly see I am not the only one in this thread with these concerns. By virtue of my being an outsider, I certainly can represent those with whom I am in correspondence without fear of reprisal, and I refuse to be bullied. > our contingency allocation (6 months of reserve) has not changed this year. How is that possible? Per http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMF_Revenue_%26_Expenses_October_2012_-_Actual_vs_Plan.png the year to date revenue was $150,000 over plan, the year to date expenses were $1,590,000 under their planned values, but the cash reserves were still less than six months of expenses. >> after the July 2012-3 Annual Plan goal was set at $46.1 million, which >> itself was substantially reduced after the Chief Revenue Office reported > > What gave you that idea? It is wrong. On the contrary, it is stated clearly at http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2012-2013_Annual_Plan_Questions_and_Answers#What.27s_the_revenue_target_for_2012-13.2C_and_how_does_it_compare_to_previous_years.3F > I would be interested to see and participate in specific discussions about > future budgets there, on Meta - including the comparative advantages of > accounts-based budgets or line items. > > This is my last response in this thread, however. I will continue to raise these issues in specific questions about budget line items, staffing levels for successful Foundation programs causing substantial community problems, the salary ratio between executive and junior staff, contingency reserve/endowment as well as ub specific questions to Board candidates concerning the statements of staff contrary to their own prior statements and the Foundation's statistical data until these issues are resolved. Sincerely, James Salsman _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
