Well, I'm not sure about that, Anthony.  By "consulted", I would mean
something to the effect of "We're looking at applying to XX for a grant of
$YYY to do ZZZ" and asking the Board if they would be likely to agree to
accept such a grant if the application is successful.  The grant
application, evaluation and approval process is costly in both time and
resources, and for both the applicant and the grantmaker.  Being informed
that a grant has been approved sounds more like a fait accompli situation
for the Board - they look petty and ungrateful if they say no, even if they
don't think it was a reasonable grant application.  In this case, we're
only dealing with $250,000.  What if this was $1 million?  $10 million?

I think it is healthier for everyone if the Board is properly consulted
before the application is submitted.  (And again, I note that we don't know
how much was actually requested in this case, only what was granted.)

Risker/Anne

On 12 February 2016 at 21:23, Anthony Cole <ahcole...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Anne, regarding:
>
> "Since the Board must approve acceptance of any donations over $100,000
> USD, it seems to be obvious that they should be consulted and possibly
> should actively approve any grant applications where the dollar value
> sought is higher than that amount."
>
> I'm not sure that the board should be *consulted* ahead of such
> applications' or should prior-approve all such applications. That seems a
> bit like micromanagement. But it makes sense to me for the board to be
> *advised
> *of such applications and when they're being actively contemplated or
> prepared.
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm sorry to hear that you feel this way, Gerard. I personally would like
> > to feel more assured that the WMF is looking into the longer future and
> > actively plannning for the day that donations no longer support a large
> > staff doing lots of things.
> >
> > I am concerned today that the team specifically tasked to work closely
> with
> > so many elements of the community has lost 7% of its staff, and 30% of
> its
> > leaders, in a single week. This should be a concern in any organization.
> >
> > With respect to the Knight grant - I know that many times grant
> > applications are made for considerably more than is given, and I am
> > interested to know how much the WMF requested in the first place.  I
> would
> > also like to know whether or not the Board was formally advised of the
> > request before it was submitted.  Since the Board must approve acceptance
> > of any donations over $100,000 USD, it seems to be obvious that they
> should
> > be consulted and possibly should actively approve any grant applications
> > where the dollar value sought is higher than that amount.  I don't
> believe
> > the current policies require advance approval or even advance
> notification,
> > though.
> >
> > Risker/Anne
> >
> > On 12 February 2016 at 03:54, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > I am not complaining. I point out that all this huha does not get us
> > > anywhere. I am not afraid to give an opinion and I am not afraid to be
> a
> > > contrarian when I think it makes sense. Yes, things happened that were
> > not
> > > beautiful. They are not what upset me. What upsets me is that people
> like
> > > Siko and Anna are leaving. Because they are part of "my" Wikimedia
> > > Foundation. What upsets me is that I routinely use Magnus's tool and
> > > process hundreds of thousands of records and am to understand that
> > official
> > > query is stunted and does not allow for this "because it was not in the
> > > design" and it is then pointed out that it takes money to solve this...
> > >
> > > My point is that baying for blood is not what helps us forward. What I
> do
> > > know is that when sheer negativity is not coupled with an ability to
> stop
> > > and move forward, we will get in a downward spiral. I fault Pine for
> not
> > > being able to stop. What I wish for is for people like Anna and Siko
> and
> > > money for our environment and not for an endowment.
> > > Thanks,
> > >       GerardM
> > >
> > > On 12 February 2016 at 09:35, Michel Vuijlsteke <wikipe...@zog.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Gerard,
> > > >
> > > > I was waiting for this mail. For me personally, your complaining is
> > > > achieving exactly the opposite of what you think.
> > > >
> > > > It sounds as if you'd much rather prefer to stick your head in the
> sand
> > > and
> > > > hope things will blow over. "Move along, nothing to see here -- oh
> > look!
> > > > something positive over there!" is not going to solve anything.
> > > >
> > > > Michel
> > > >
> > > > On 12 February 2016 at 09:24, Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > Pine as you are talking about "self inflicting wounds" I take it
> you
> > > are
> > > > > not talking in your personal capacity. When is it enough for you?
> > When
> > > > are
> > > > > you going to talk about positive things, things that will move us
> > > > forward.
> > > > > Why ask for blood and more blood? What is it that you hope to
> > achieve?
> > > > >
> > > > > Who do you represent in this unending litany of negativity and what
> > > have
> > > > > you achieved in this way? When Lila was engaged in her role, she
> was
> > to
> > > > > direct in a different direction and she is doing that. You may not
> > like
> > > > it
> > > > > and that is ok.
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >        GerardM
> > > > >
> > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 08:43, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Dariusz, thanks for continuing to engage here. Besides the good
> > > > questions
> > > > > > that others have asked, I'll add a few:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. If the Knowledge Engine is such an important project, why is
> it
> > > not
> > > > > > mentioned in
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2015-16
> > > > > ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. I realize that as a percentage of the WMF budget, $250k is a
> > > > > relatively
> > > > > > small number. As others have said, this is not a reason for
> opacity
> > > > about
> > > > > > it, nor a reason for not having a conversation with the community
> > > about
> > > > > > something so strategically important as a decision to explore the
> > > > > question
> > > > > > of "Would users go to Wikipedia if it were an open channel beyond
> > an
> > > > > > encyclopedia?" It's one thing to have a blue-sky exercise
> thinking
> > > > about
> > > > > > possibilities, and another thing to take a $250k step in that
> > > > direction,
> > > > > > especially without consulting the community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. I am getting tired about seeing bad news in general about WMF
> > > > > > governance, planning, and turnover. I am curious how you plan to
> > > > address
> > > > > > those issues. Like you, I would rather that we be talking about
> our
> > > > > > movement plans for the next 10 years. However, it's difficult to
> > have
> > > > > those
> > > > > > conversations when WMF is making so many self-inflicted wounds.
> The
> > > > > recent
> > > > > > round of resignations is of respectable people from the WMF staff
> > is
> > > > > making
> > > > > > the situation that much more concerning and that much more
> > difficult
> > > to
> > > > > > recover from. It seems to me that WMF leadership has lost control
> > of
> > > > this
> > > > > > situation, and I'd like to hear what the recovery plan is.
> > > Personally,
> > > > I
> > > > > > feel that we need leadership that can build good relationships
> with
> > > the
> > > > > > staff and community, is transparent by default, and is capable of
> > > > > restoring
> > > > > > the credibility of the organization's planning, execution, and
> > > > goodwill.
> > > > > I
> > > > > > think that we may need new leadership to make that happen. I am
> > > > > interested
> > > > > > to hear your thoughts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Pine
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak <
> > > dar...@alk.edu.pl
> > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 11.02.2016 10:23 PM "SarahSV" <sarahsv.w...@gmail.com>
> > napisał(a):
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > ​Hi ​
> > > > > > > > Dariusz,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ​T​
> > > > > > > > he grant application doesn't restrict the search engine to
> > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > projects. It says that the "Knowledge Engine by Wikipedia [is
> a]
> > > > system
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > discovering reliable and trustworthy public information on the
> > > > > Internet.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My understanding is that the top range could potentially be all
> > > > > > open/public
> > > > > > > resources, but this is the far stretched total goal, and still
> > not
> > > a
> > > > > > > general search engine of all content including commercial one.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > And a rrasonable realistic outcome can be just improving our
> > > searches
> > > > > > > across projects.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I can't comment on the initial ideas or goals, as I was not on
> > the
> > > > > Board
> > > > > > > before August 2015, but this is what I understand we build now.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The document says the "Search Engine by Wikipedia" budget for
> > > > > 2015–2016
> > > > > > > ($2.4 million) was approved by the ​board. Can you point us to
> > > which
> > > > > > board
> > > > > > > meeting approved it and what was discussed there?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I dont recall this specifically, and I'm going to elude this
> > > question
> > > > > by
> > > > > > > going to sleep (and hoping someone better informed may pick).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Good night!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dj
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to