>By not explaining clearly to the community what was happening initially,
Please don't speak for the entire community. Plenty of us thought that their response was quite clear. On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 1:26 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com> wrote: > Greg and Anna > > This is a most interesting response and illustrates very well the value of > transparency. By not explaining clearly to the community what was > happening initially, the Foundation has managed to place itself and the > community at odds, and has managed to spend ten hours of staff time (ten > hours – really?) explaining that you are not going to explain the > Foundation's system of financial monitoring and control over this > multi-million dollar project. > > Perhaps next time a valued member of the community asks a sensible question > about a point of financial management you will be more ready, willing and > able to give a clear concise and informative answer to the community and > pre-empt this sort of unproductive discussion. The more information you > share with the community, the more acceptance, goodwill and trust you will > build in that community, and, the better placed the community wil be to > help you. > > "Rogol" > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:53 PM, Gregory Varnum <gvar...@wikimedia.org> > wrote: > > > Pine, > > > > A proper response would take the Wikimedia Foundation some time to > > prepare. As Anna has tried to indicate, and as evidenced by a number of > > things, there are indeed a number of financial oversights. > > > > Regarding costs, as has been previously stated by the Foundation and > > Board, the Board approved a spending resolution last year for expenses > > related to the movement strategy of up to $2.5 million over Fiscal Year > > 2016-17 (July 2016 - June 2017) and Fiscal Year 2017-18 (July 2017 - June > > 2018). > > > > On the topic of how resources are spent, I would like to share more on > the > > cost of your request. Because you escalated in your language (e.g., > calling > > our financial practices lax and asking to speak to a member of the > Board), > > three senior leaders and two Board members have now spent time on this. I > > imagine that your concern is genuine, but the speed with which you went > > from asking for financial details when we have ample financial oversight, > > to hinting at fiscal malfeasance was a bit quick. > > > > You may not know this, but these kinds of requests are costly, > > particularly when it escalates with a strongly negative comment and a > > demand to speak to a Board member. I share these figures on the cost of > > this request thus far in the service of transparency. > > > > • 6: Number of staff involved in responding, including 3 senior leaders > > • 2: Number of Board members now involved > > • 1.5 hours: Estimated amount of Board time spent thus far > > • 10 hours: Estimated amount of staff time spent thus far > > • $1,500: Estimated cost of staff time (considering expenses beyond just > > salary) > > > > Providing the detailed answer you have requested would require > > considerably more time and increase the cost more. We have decided not to > > provide that response because we have ample financial oversight and we > > would like not to set a precedent of spending resources discussing this > > level of detail on financial matters. You are a valued member of this > > community, and this is not the best way for us to work together. That is > > why we have established processes. > > > > We appreciate your passion and dedication to the vision and our > > communities and hope you will read this response in the good faith that > it > > was written. > > > > Greg and Anna (2 of the 6 staff involved) > > > > > > > > > On Jun 27, 2017, at 3:38 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Anna, > > > > > >>> * How much is this timeline extension projected to cost, and from > what > > >>> source are the funds being drawn? (Note that this doesn't assume that > > the > > >>> decision was a bad one, but I very much want to know the source of > the > > >>> funds and how much is likely to be drawn from it.) > > >> > > >> > > >> We've got this covered, Pine. We are fiscally managing this process > and > > all > > >> of our contracts well. Thank you for your concern. > > > > > > Please answer my question: how much is this timeline extension > projected > > to > > > cost, > > > and from what source are the funds being drawn? > > > > > > > > >>> * Could you elaborate on the benefits of this timetable change for > > people > > >>> who are not involved with affiliates? We've seen some responses from > > >>> Strainu and Yaroslov (thank you both!) and I would like to hear WMF's > > >>> perspective. > > >>> > > > > > >> The benefits of the change in the timetable are that 4/4 stakeholder > > > groups > > >> told us that this was a meaningful exercise, that they are earnestly > > >> engaged in thinking about the future, and that they need more time for > > >> translation and conversation on this important subject. 3/4 tracks are > > non > > >> affiliates (on-wiki, new voices, experts). > > > > > >> We agreed with them. These are meaningful conversations. We are > > learning a > > >> lot and we need to hear what people have to say and they need more > time > > to > > >> say it. > > > > > > OK, that makes sense. > > > > > >> > > >> * Could you also discuss what measures are being taken to control > costs > > in > > >> the strategy process? > > >> > > > > > >> We have plenty of measures in place to monitor costs (e.g., we don't > > need > > >> to control them because they are not out of control, we are within our > > >> budget). Also, describing financial metrics at any lower level of > detail > > >> would be a waste of the strategy budget since we are within it. > > > > > > I disagree with that assessment. Simply because expenses are within > > > budget don't mean that all expenses which were charged to the budget > > > are reasonable and accurate, and I am disappointed to hear that WMF's > > > standards for its finances are so lax. This convinces me all the more > > > that my original request is important for WMF to answer: please discuss > > > what measures are being taken to control costs in the strategy process. > > > The level of detail that I now think WMF should provide is much higher > > > than the level of detail with which I previously would have been > > satisfied. > > > My level of concern here is high enough that I am asking the WMF > > > Audit Committee chair, Kelly, to comment on this situation. Something > > seems > > > very wrong here, and I am concerned about WMF's financial integrity. > > > > > > Pine > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 8:33 PM, Anna Stillwell < > > astillw...@wikimedia.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hello Pine, > > >> > > >> Good evening. In line. > > >> > > >> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >>> This thread is going in many directions, and I'm enjoying reading the > > >>> conversation. > > >>> > > >>> If I may go back to some questions that I asked in my earlier post, I > > >> would > > >>> like to hear from Katherine (or someone else at WMF, perhaps Anna): > > >>> > > >> > > >> First, some context... a good deal of this has been iterative by > > design. We > > >> had an overarching idea of where we were headed (e.g. a shared > direction > > >> first, roles and responsibilities second), but then we knew we would > > learn > > >> to refine or course correct based on what we hear. > > >> > > >> We've been hearing to extend the timeline on all fronts--organized > > groups > > >> and affiliates (e.g., time for conversation), on wiki (e.g., time for > > >> translation and conversation) and new voices and experts (e.g., "we've > > seen > > >> all of the data but our communities have yet to see and reflect upon > > >> it")... so that is the background reasoning. > > >> > > >> > > >>> * How much is this timeline extension projected to cost, and from > what > > >>> source are the funds being drawn? (Note that this doesn't assume that > > the > > >>> decision was a bad one, but I very much want to know the source of > the > > >>> funds and how much is likely to be drawn from it.) > > >>> > > >> > > >> We've got this covered, Pine. We are fiscally managing this process > and > > all > > >> of our contracts well. Thank you for your concern. > > >> > > >> > > >>> * Could you elaborate on the benefits of this timetable change for > > people > > >>> who are not involved with affiliates? We've seen some responses from > > >>> Strainu and Yaroslov (thank you both!) and I would like to hear WMF's > > >>> perspective. > > >>> > > >> > > >> The benefits of the change in the timetable are that 4/4 stakeholder > > groups > > >> told us that this was a meaningful exercise, that they are earnestly > > >> engaged in thinking about the future, and that they need more time for > > >> translation and conversation on this important subject. 3/4 tracks are > > non > > >> affiliates (on-wiki, new voices, experts). > > >> > > >> We agreed with them. These are meaningful conversations. We are > > learning a > > >> lot and we need to hear what people have to say and they need more > time > > to > > >> say it. > > >> > > >>> > > >>> * Could you also discuss what measures are being taken to control > costs > > >> in > > >>> the strategy process? > > >>> > > >> > > >> We have plenty of measures in place to monitor costs (e.g., we don't > > need > > >> to control them because they are not out of control, we are within our > > >> budget). Also, describing financial metrics at any lower level of > detail > > >> would be a waste of the strategy budget since we are within it. > > >> > > >> Always good to hear from you, > > >> /a > > >> > > >> > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, > > >>> > > >>> Pine > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > >>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > >>> wiki/Wikimedia-l > > >>> 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l > > >> 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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>
