Talk:Fundraising and Funds Dissemination/Recommendations

This page is for discussions related to the Fundraising and Funds Dissemination/Recommendations page.   Please remember to: Sign posts using the four tildes (~~~~) Remain civil and polite during discussions. Place new text under old text (start a new post)

Archives Index, 2012-01, 2012-02

Future of fundraising discussion - Index
Guiding Principles discussion Introduction fundraising principles funds distribution principles Fundraising models/future discussion Introduction, timeline & faq Goals New!Zack's observations on online fundraising New!How long will the Fundraiser keep growing? New!Wikimedia Foundation staff memo and analysis Recommendations from Sue Recommendations discussion Recommendations Q&A Brainstorming about Recommendation 4 Pros and cons Questions flowchart Fundraising options Alternative recommendations and philosophies Alternative recommendations (Open to all contributions) Recommendations by Tango Wikimedia Foundation resolutions WMF resolution: Wikimedia fundraising principles (10-9-2010) WMF communication: Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees letter regarding fundraising accountability (8-5-2011) Resolution:Developing Scenarios for future of fundraising (1-18-2012) New! Draft Board resolution (2-9-12) Wikimedia chapter resolutions Wikimedia’s culture of sharing (Wikimedia De) Resolution on principles (Wikimedia UK) The importance of being a Wikimedia chapter (Wikimedia IT) Iberocoop joint statement Overview of relevant data Sign up to participate Initial Thoughts Draft grantmaking survey Funds Dissemination Criteria Table Resource list (for survey preparation) Where the money comes from today

Board communication

See Fundraising_and_Funds_Dissemination/draft Board resolution for the text of the letter.

<redacted>
The text above is reproduced from an email sent by Ting Chen three hours ago on behalf of the Board to the mailing list Foundation-L. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) 11:49, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I think this should be moved to it's own page with it's own talk page and they should be here on Meta. Say Fundraising_and_Funds_Dissemination/draft Board resolution. ok Maggie? Filceolaire 23:03, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

We can if you think we should, Filceolaire. :) I was a little hesitant to enshrine it to quite that degree since it was a preliminary communication that they suggest may be modified prior to their official resolution. I'm not sure how much discussion to expect, though, as I believe many chapter representatives have voiced their thoughts on the Internal-L mailing list. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) 13:05, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Since it is not *just* a reply to Sue's recommendations, I think that moving it to an own page is an excellent idea. That way we can focus further discussion which is no longer based on Sue's recommendations but on this draft there, instead of incorrectly here. Effeietsanders 15:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

All righty, then. Since you both think a draft is okay with its own page, I have set it up accordingly. I look forward to reading the conversation there. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) 13:43, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

The cool thing about the draft having it's own page and it's own talk page is that the board can develop it in full view with tweaks and revisions done there to respond to comments. It's the wikiway. 93.96.237.210 20:37, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I can't say if that's going to happen; I don't know if anyone on the Board is even aware that it's on Meta. :) I brought it here from the mailing list simply because I thought those who do not follow the mailing lists would probably like to see it. I wasn't asked or directed to do so. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 21:04, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

New page

Just wanted to put out a heads up that Zack Exley has shared some thoughts and experiences on last year's fundraiser at Fundraising and Funds Dissemination/Online fundraising. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) 22:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Another new page. There is now Fundraising and Funds Dissemination/Staff memo, with several appendices. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) 17:36, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

my own thoughts

I have just read the February 2012 Fundraising Letter and I am really worried about the reported thoughts on chapters and fundraising. I understand that at the moment the focus has been put on concepts and not on actual wording, so I won't speak about the term "payment processing" which I assure you is really derogatory.

My concern is that centralization of the fundraising, with chapters grudgingly allowed to take part in it just "for reasons of tax". My own vision is different: WMF and the local chapter must be seen as two sides of the same medal, with the Foundation having a global view of what happens (and managing the servers with all their burden...) and the Chapter being the interface with the community. This means that the yearly budget must be clearly divided between centralized and distributed functions, and the Chapters will contribute to the centralized functions and give to the WMF part of the rest of the money raised, so that they may be distributed to poorer Chapters and places where a Chapter has not been established yet.

In this way I think the "glocal" function of Wikipedia could be better accomplished.

-- (WMIT) .mau. ✉ 14:12, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

exactly this is my sorrow: "the Chapter being the interface with the community". What do u think if in German WP one of the members is an admin and oppresses all views against the chapters view? In my eyes...I will not discuss this any further, ridiculous, thats all.--Angel54 5 16:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC) And a short appx: with automatic programming - he decides, on which sites its allowed to write and so on.

means: cut them all the money, so they come down to earth once again and know, what is their duty...--Angel54 5 18:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC) And btw. I know that isnt fair. But a member of the board here (the last one, responsible for press) stated in a blog (my words): So what, we are in a comfortable position, we dont need the community anymore, we only need to commercialize this. The results already are in.--Angel54 5 18:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

there isnt any support. Someone asking for a ticket to wikimania, is forwarned, that the rules are not just set. If she (and I think its a she, I dont know) will do that on her own, than there wasnt anything concrete... thats how the officials react (the members can ask for anything, if its granted, I dont know, perhaps, take the risk u dont get anything paid back)...recent case. So what? There are some people sitting on the money...--Angel54 5 19:28, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Angel54, if you have problems with WMDE you should address your thoughts to them. This discussion is not about a single chapter, it is about the direction the whole Wikiemdia thing is moving. And I believe it would be very helpful even for WMDE to know what you are talking about. I don't think that vague intimations can assist to find a common sense on how to go on with this issue. --lyzzy 20:09, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Dont even think, I didnt write emails to Pavel Richter. I shall what? Distribute contents of emails here? U should go about common sense, right? And I Know, who user Lyzzy is, right? Another one bites the dust...--Angel54 5 20:25, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

What I dont understand...ur a woman too. Why cant u support sth like that?--Angel54 5 20:45, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

the view of Mau is a good starting point, but consider what happens when:

• The chapter raises and manages funds that are higger of it's prevision of spends
• How to fit into the online community to a unique monolithic model, based on political boundaries
• What to do about a place that already has a chapter and there is a group that wants to have another
• The chapter does not become an interface with a notable part of the community.

--Mafoso 17:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mafoso,

I agree that the last point you raised (the Chapter not doing well with the community) is quite problematic: in such cases probably WMF should take action in taking back its support to the chapter, but this could mean that some funds were lost. (Your point "someone wants to create a second Chapter in the same region" is not that different, if you come to think about it). It's however reasonable that these turmoils do not happen all of a sudden: I think that one of the scope of WMF, since it is the fathering organization, is to check what happens in the various Chapters.

As for your first point, I don't see any issue: the Chapter has a provisional budget, and if donation are much more than foreseen all further money goes to WMF, maybe with the provision to distribute it to poorer chapters.

I do not understand exactly your second point. Could you please explain it again?

from WM-IT, --.mau. ✉ 16:00, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Page translation discouraged

As Sue has allegedly made recommendations to be the board, I have removed the translation recommendation for this page, so that it no longer shows up in Special:LanguageStats. It is unknown if the current version was what was recommended, or if the actual recommendations were different, because she has not edited the page since January 6, 2012. --Siebrand (talk) 13:58, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Deadline

Sue's final recommendations to the Board will be presented on March 9, based in part on discussion of the draft recommendations. She appreciates the conversations, which she has found helpful, and would welcome further discussion right up until that deadline. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 21:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)