A sidenote: raising funds is probably a better term - fundraising is historically in Wikimedia often used to refer specifically to the small donors. A process which chapters have been barred from unfortunately, and which faces some interesting struggles on the WMF-side right now. But I guess it's bound to be confusing.
Lodewijk On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Sydney Poore <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, external funding can come in many different forms. Ideally, a not for > profit will develop strategic partnerships that will give them access to > more volunteers, in kind services and good, and also financial > contributions. Good alliances will spark innovation or provide > opportunities that would not otherwise exist. We are already seeing this > happen in many organizations but it is not always being documented and > shared. > > The FDC is asking the WMF staff to open a dialogue with the affiliated > organization (chapters and thematic organizations) around the area of > fundraising in order to learn more about the ways that they can be > supported when they do local fundraising. There is much learning that can > come from sharing among the different chapters. > > Sydney > > > Sydney Poore > User:FloNight > Wikipedian in Residence > at Cochrane Collaboration > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Lodewijk <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Most of the points you make are unrelated to funding, but have more to do > > with movement priorities. I also think there are many things to be > improved > > there. I feel with you that chapters often have a stronger connection to > > the community and what is required to help the community do their job. > The > > toolserver was indeed a strong example. > > > > But that is not the point of discussion - we were talking about external > > funding an sich. I think it is good if affiliates get their core funded > > through the WMF - but I disagree that seeking external partners must > always > > stifle innovation. I think it could actually spark innovation. I see too > > many organizations that become reliant on a single source of funding, and > > become lazy in innovations that way. > > > > So where possible, I definitely do cheer upon chapters that manage to > find > > external funding for some of their projects. And yes, there are > limitations > > to this - it should not interfere with our creativity. I will definitely > do > > my part to support such efforts in the Netherlands. Sometimes external > > funding can allow us to run projects that might not easily be approved by > > our committees, because it is 'too expensive'. > > > > Lodewijk > > > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Gerard Meijssen < > > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hoi, > > > Lodewijk when the funding process stifles innovation and, it does by > > > design. The process is suboptimal. When the argument is made that the > > > chapters are second class citizens BECAUSE they are foced into a yearly > > > straight jacket and BECAUSE they forcibly lost their involvement in > fund > > > raising. Arguably it makes sense to look for alternative funding. > > However, > > > the chapters are for their projects dependent on WMF projects where > they > > do > > > not have any control either. All GLAM projects rely on LABS and it is > NOT > > > considered a production environment.This is best expressed that with > the > > > move of Yuvi Panda to the USA, the availability of LABS personnel will > > > consequently become worse. The quality of the up time of services is > not > > > good. > > > > > > My observation that chapters are second class citizens is very much > based > > > on their involvement in critical processes. When the German chapter is > > > denied its funding, Wikidata was cherry picked for full funding. This > > > denies the ownership of the German chapter of this project. Several > > > chapters are independent of WMF funding. They do not answer to "the > > > community" that wants to own them and determine for them. When the > > > Toolserver was ended in favour of Labs, it lost its involvement in > > hardware > > > and services. This point is NOT about the quality of Labs but about the > > > involvement of chapters. It was removed.and nothing remains that > empowers > > > chapters in this. > > > > > > In discussion we hear about the "community" about committees but there > is > > > no sense at all of the chapters as an equal partner.This is imho not > > > healthy for us as a movement. > > > Thanks, > > > GerardM > > > > > > > > > > > > On 26 November 2014 at 19:45, Lodewijk <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I don't quite agree. > > > > > > > > Raising funds from institutions can sometimes even help improve your > > > impact > > > > - it forces you to think beyond the usual lines of thought. It makes > > you > > > > think about further partnerships, which might also help your mission. > > In > > > > the longer run, it makes you less dependent of a single party, which > > > helps > > > > with answering the constantly changing requirements for reporting to > > the > > > > Wikimedia Foundation (which are often with good intentions, but the > > > > constant changes also cost time). > > > > > > > > But yes, there are instances where getting a grant costs more effort > > than > > > > you would like. At the same time, it helps you to be more flexible: > the > > > > annual grants process is quite inflexible, as it limits the funds > for a > > > > whole year - for the basis this is great, but for innovative projects > > > > sometimes external funding is more effective. > > > > > > > > Lets not reject the idea of external funding out of hand. There are > > > > positive sides and of course also negative sides. Lets first aim for > > > grants > > > > where the positive sides outweigh the negative sides, also locally, > and > > > > when the balance goes the other way discuss again. > > > > > > > > At the same time, I do feel a need to emphasize that I would consider > > it > > > > unjust if the FDC (If, I don't say it does) would either reduce an > > > > affiliate's budget because they don't raise external funds for > whatever > > > > reason, but equally unjust if they would reduce funding because they > > > > already raise so much externally. Both would be wrong. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Lodewijk > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Gerard Meijssen < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hoi, > > > > > Fund raising costs money. It affects effectivity negatively. For > this > > > > > reason it is a poor strategy to raise funds. > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > GerardM > > > > > > > > > > On 26 November 2014 at 13:16, Dariusz Jemielniak < > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Let me reiterate: the FDC definitely DOES NOT try to dump > > fundraising > > > > on > > > > > > the chapters. > > > > > > > > > > > > However, we recognize that sometimes funding or inkind support > is > > > > > > available more easily than elsewhere. We once had a situation > that > > a > > > > > > chapter declared they could get external funding easily for a > > > projected > > > > > > they applied for to the FDC, but they just didn't. Some chapters > > > have a > > > > > > possibility to get office space for free or at a reduced price. > > Etc. > > > It > > > > > > would just make sense to think if the movement's resources > > sparingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > If funds are not available, or if one tries and fails - that's > > > totally > > > > > > fine. > > > > > > > > > > > > Best > > > > > > > > > > > > Dj > > > > > > 26 lis 2014 09:42 "rupert THURNER" <[email protected]> > > > > > napisał(a): > > > > > > > > > > > > > While I understand the arguments of the fdc in the light of the > > > > > policies > > > > > > > they are bound to, what you Gerard write , really hits the core > > of > > > > the > > > > > > > challenge we are facing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I find the most hypocritical is that the wmf and the fdc > > want > > > to > > > > > > dump > > > > > > > other organizations into fundraising adventures the wmf with > all > > > its > > > > > > > professionalism tried and found unsatisfactory. when sue > Gardner > > > > > startet > > > > > > > there were four income channels. First, Business development, > > which > > > > > never > > > > > > > gave income. Second, get money from the rich, which gave a > > glorious > > > > > > > conflict of interest discussion e.g. when virgin doubled part > of > > > the > > > > > 2006 > > > > > > > fundraiser. I never heard of this one again. Third, get money > > from > > > > the > > > > > > > dead aka applying for grants to other foundations. This proved > > > > > expensive > > > > > > > compared to the result, mostly giving restricted funds which > then > > > > > > resulted > > > > > > > in problems with reporting the success. Many of the chapters > face > > > > this > > > > > > > today. And fourth, as now only remaining cornerstone, get money > > > from > > > > > the > > > > > > > poor, aka fundraising banners on the website. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The wmf today plays two roles, spending money and owning the > > > website, > > > > > and > > > > > > > with it deriving the single right to collect money of it. Which > > is > > > an > > > > > > > inherent conflict of interest imo responsible for 99% of the > > > > > > inefficiencies > > > > > > > we have today, including the local focus brought up by Gerard. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rupert > > > > > > > On Nov 26, 2014 8:05 AM, "Gerard Meijssen" < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hoi, > > > > > > > > With all respect, these are pennies to the pound. When you > have > > > > > people > > > > > > > > working professionally the choice is very much: are they to > do > > a > > > > job > > > > > or > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > they to raise funds and do a job. To do the latter > effectively > > it > > > > > takes > > > > > > > two > > > > > > > > because the skills involved are different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I completely agree that it is possible to raise much more > > money. > > > > > > However, > > > > > > > > in the current model where the foundation monopolised fund > > > raising > > > > > and > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > doing the best possible job the amounts raised are not > > optimized. > > > > > > > Currently > > > > > > > > it is not needed. The notion that all money raised should go > in > > > one > > > > > pot > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > foolish because the reality is that several chapter opt out > of > > > the > > > > > > > process > > > > > > > > altogether. Several of these make more money than they can > > > > > comfortably > > > > > > > > handle BUT cannot share for legal reasons, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What we have is a political correct monstrosity that does not > > > what > > > > it > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > supposed to do under the notions of political correctness. It > > > would > > > > > be > > > > > > > much > > > > > > > > better when the whole process of fundraising and spending was > > > > changed > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > such a way that the process became more equal, A process > where > > > the > > > > > > > chapters > > > > > > > > can more easily take up jobs they are suited for. Why for > > > instance > > > > > have > > > > > > > > developers go to the USA while they can live really > comfortable > > > in > > > > > > > > countries like India where there is an abundance of really > > smart > > > > and > > > > > > > > educated people ? Why not have technical projects run in > India? > > > (I > > > > > know > > > > > > > > reasons why not but they are not the point). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We do not have metrics for many jobs. What we have we do not > > > apply > > > > > > > equally > > > > > > > > or divide on equal terms. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > GerardM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > NB Wikidata is underfunded > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 25 November 2014 at 21:25, Anders Wennersten < > > > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As Nathan I see no contradiction. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would feel embarrassed if WMSE had used FDC funding in > > > their > > > > > > > project > > > > > > > > > to get more female contributes. Also as it is rather easy > to > > > get > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > funded from within Sweden and semi-government financing > > > > > organisations > > > > > > > > (but > > > > > > > > > not for WMF to "get" that money for general use) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But I feel quite comfortable that FDC money was used to buy > > the > > > > > > camera > > > > > > > > > that was used by a volunteer in ESC 2013 to take photos > that > > > has > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > uploaded to Commons and used in 60+ versions and been > viewed > > > > > almost a > > > > > > > > > million times and believe our small donors would approve of > > > that > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nathan skrev den 2014-11-25 20:45: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Liam Wyatt < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Both of these policies are internally consistent and > > logical, > > > > > > > however I > > > > > > > > >>> believe that they are at least partially contradictory. I > > > > believe > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > FDC > > > > > > > > >>> is working on the best advice it has available, and I > know > > > > that I > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > >>> not > > > > > > > > >>> read *all *the most recent documentation about Chapter > > > > finances. > > > > > > > But, I > > > > > > > > >>> would like to know if there is a policy position from the > > WMF > > > > > Board > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > >>> Trustees that clarifies what is expected of Chapters in > > this > > > > > area. > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Can you elaborate just a little on how you find them to be > > > > > > > > contradictory? > > > > > > > > >> If we assume, as I think is reasonable, that the first > > > principle > > > > > > > applies > > > > > > > > >> to > > > > > > > > >> funds raised by WMF and the second is directed at funds > > raised > > > > by > > > > > > > > >> individual affiliates, they don't seem to me to be in > > > conflict. > > > > > > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > > > > > > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > > > > > > >> [email protected] > > > > > > > > >> Unsubscribe: > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > > > > > > , > > > > > > > > >> <mailto:[email protected] > > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > > > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > > [email protected] > > > > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > [email protected] > > > < > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/[email protected] > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > [email protected] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
