the idea that we've been discussing for a while has been introducing a part
of WMF budget ("non-core") into the FDC process. The whole is not viable
for various reasons, but a part - sure.
I also agree that the FDC may be a catalyst of introducing more
transparency, better and SMARTer goals, strategy, etc.
My doubts only refer to the FDC's ability to deal with budgets of this
magnitude - and this caution should be exercised for any organization
within our movement when it reaches certain size (a good question would
e.g. be if WMDE is there yet).
On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <
> Dariusz, without speaking on behalf of the FDC, and only my own opinion -
> I don't think the question is if the FDC will recommend how much money the
> WMF need to get - as the fact that if they will enter the FDC process,
> under the SAME requirements as other affiliates (the requirement for a
> detailed budget, clear targets and goals, strategy and others) - only the
> process himself, without the recommendations, will be much more transparent
> and clear to the community then ever. This will allow them to have real
> time and enough data to give a REAL feedback, and also to the FDC, as much
> as they can. When he has not specific deadline (like others have), it
> turns out that every year he select a different "community process" (if
> *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> +972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl>
>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > For historical reference: I felt that WMF made significant progress with
>> > the 2013-2014 budget by opening it to community review and FDC review.
>> I agree that there was a good trend that got reverted, as a result of
>> dropping the core/non-core distinction. It would be good in there was a
>> significant part of what WMF does (in particular, in the area of new
>> initiatives, innovation, non-core activities) that'd would be evaluated by
>> the FDC. There are many benefits: the ability to lead by example to other
>> organizations in the movement, more transparency, more qualitative
>> from the community (the FDC is an expert, yet community-driven body, able
>> to dig into more details than a general online discussion), less
>> of unequal treatment, etc. In the same time, there are serious
>> considerations: how large a budget can be for the FDC to still be able to
>> handle it professionally? Should the standards be the same for large
>> organizations (WMF and WMDE) and the medium ones? Can the FDC handle WMF
>> budget in their current rounds schedule?
>> I hope we will be able to carry on a meaningful conversation about this,
>> naturally involving WMF executive team, the FDC itself, and so on (in
>> we have been discussing the issues pointed above, to find solutions).
>> Dariusz Jemielniak "pundit"
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
i grupy badawczej NeRDS
Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
członek Akademii Młodych Uczonych Polskiej Akademii Nauk
członek Komitetu Polityki Naukowej MNiSW
Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: