Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Foundation

Funding for the newly elected Board Members

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

daniwo59 at aol

Jun 18, 2004, 6:36 PM

Post #1 of 39 (365 views)
Permalink

Funding for the newly elected Board Members

Hello,

I know that the Wikimedia is currently strapped for cash. However, I would
like to propose that we cover certain key expenses for our elected board members
relating to their participation in Wikimedia work. For instance, telephone
calls overseas should be covered by the Foundation, and not the elected
representatives. A broadband connection should be covered by the Foundation as well.

While every participant is doing their work on Wikipedia and the other
projects voluntarily, Ant and Angela are expected to represent us, the users. We
should make it as easy for them as possible.

I hope you support my proposal.

Danny

hdcheney at yahoo

Jun 18, 2004, 9:55 PM

Post #2 of 39 (363 views)
Permalink

Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

If the Wikimedia Foundation starts giving the trustees
"perks" I feel that fundraising could be quite a bit
harder. Instead of making international phone call,
can't voice over IP be used? From an accounting
perspective, would the trustees be required to
reimburse the foundation for personal internet usage
on the foundation's broadband account?

I very strongly oppose this proposal. Maybe we could
focus on cost controls instead?

A cost saving, and confidence building measure I would
like to see is the trustees having their meeting in
IRC and releasing the minutes to donors or the
public. Not only would this save international
airfare, lodging, dining, etc - it would provide more
transparentcy.

--H. Cheney

--- daniwo59 [at] aol wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I know that the Wikimedia is currently strapped for
> cash. However, I would
> like to propose that we cover certain key expenses
> for our elected board members
> relating to their participation in Wikimedia work.
> For instance, telephone
> calls overseas should be covered by the Foundation,
> and not the elected
> representatives. A broadband connection should be
> covered by the Foundation as well.
>
> While every participant is doing their work on
> Wikipedia and the other
> projects voluntarily, Ant and Angela are expected to
> represent us, the users. We
> should make it as easy for them as possible.
>
> I hope you support my proposal.
>
> Danny
> > _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] wikimedia
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

sannse at tiscali

Jun 18, 2004, 11:51 PM

Post #3 of 39 (365 views)
Permalink

Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

> Hello,
>
> I know that the Wikimedia is currently strapped for cash. However, I would
> like to propose that we cover certain key expenses for our elected board
members
> relating to their participation in Wikimedia work. For instance, telephone
> calls overseas should be covered by the Foundation, and not the elected
> representatives. A broadband connection should be covered by the
Foundation as well.
>
> While every participant is doing their work on Wikipedia and the other
> projects voluntarily, Ant and Angela are expected to represent us, the
users. We
> should make it as easy for them as possible.
>
> I hope you support my proposal.
>
> Danny

Absolutely.

Flying them to the US every week to attend meetings might be a /little/
beyond our budget ;) But certainly Foundation related phone calls should be
covered. And if we need them to have a better connection then that should
be paid for too.

To reply to H. Cheney's concerns - this isn't about perks, it's about them
not being out of pocket with the extra costs that are going to crop up.
They are doing the Foundation a service, they shouldn't also have to pay
extra to do so.

This is very much standard practice for all organisations I would have
thought.

Regards

--sannse

delirium at hackish

Jun 20, 2004, 5:39 PM

Post #4 of 39 (363 views)
Permalink

Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

daniwo59 [at] aol wrote:

> I know that the Wikimedia is currently strapped for cash. However, I
> would like to propose that we cover certain key expenses for our
> elected board members relating to their participation in Wikimedia
> work. For instance, telephone calls overseas should be covered by the
> Foundation, and not the elected representatives. A broadband
> connection should be covered by the Foundation as well.
>
> While every participant is doing their work on Wikipedia and the other
> projects voluntarily, Ant and Angela are expected to represent us, the
> users. We should make it as easy for them as possible.

I wouldn't consider this a high priority---certainly far below buying
servers, which we already don't have enough money to buy. Unless we
find ourselves in a situation where we have so much cash we don't have
any place it could better be spent, I think a better approach would be
to simply use email to communicate like everyone else does. As for
internet connections, I assume anyone involved in the project already
has one (how else would they be Wikipedians, given that this is
primarily an internet-based project?).

-Mark

delirium at hackish

Jun 20, 2004, 5:48 PM

Post #5 of 39 (364 views)
Permalink

Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

anthere9 at yahoo

Jun 21, 2004, 12:06 AM

Post #6 of 39 (362 views)
Permalink

Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Delirium wrote:
> daniwo59 [at] aol wrote:
>
>> I know that the Wikimedia is currently strapped for cash. However, I
>> would like to propose that we cover certain key expenses for our
>> elected board members relating to their participation in Wikimedia
>> work. For instance, telephone calls overseas should be covered by the
>> Foundation, and not the elected representatives. A broadband
>> connection should be covered by the Foundation as well.
>>
>> While every participant is doing their work on Wikipedia and the other
>> projects voluntarily, Ant and Angela are expected to represent us, the
>> users. We should make it as easy for them as possible.
>
>
> I wouldn't consider this a high priority---certainly far below buying
> servers, which we already don't have enough money to buy.

I think we should relieve you of your fears with regards to this issue
Mark :-)

Last evening, we were discussing of how much money was currently in bank.
I made a quick estimate, because Mav in on holidays, so I could not ask
him last numbers, but basically I know that mid may we had roughly 5.400
dollars. Add to this the 9000 dollars refund for a server. Plus 10.000
euros received a few days ago by Jimbo for the trophy.

That makes about 24 000 dollars (it is a *very* rough estimate).

JeLuF made a provisional hardware budget for the rest of the year.
You may find it here :
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_provisional_budget
Current amount indicated is 12000 dollars

We naturally have also to plan for contingencies.

So, I would not say that we do not have *enough* money to buy servers.
The problem might be somewhere else.

I would say that we should plan a fund raising time in fall. It will be
necessary. But saying we do not have enough money right now is just
plain incorrect.

Unless we
> find ourselves in a situation where we have so much cash we don't have
> any place it could better be spent, I think a better approach would be
> to simply use email to communicate like everyone else does. As for
> internet connections, I assume anyone involved in the project already
> has one (how else would they be Wikipedians, given that this is
> primarily an internet-based project?).
>
> -Mark

Yes. You are correct. But perhaps a board member is not only in touch
with wikipedians, but also with the outside world. And though I tried to
suggest a couple of journalists to connect to irc or only use emails,
I really do not understand why they strongly insist on phone meeting or
better, face to face meetings :-)....
Same goes for meetings where Wikipedia is presented. Very curious :-)

>Adding a qualification to this: I wouldn't be opposed to voluntary
>donations by people who feel strongly about this. If there are
>expenses that are turning out to be problematic, there could be a
>fund-raising campaign to provide funding for the board members. But
>this should come out of specific donations for that purpose: people
>should know they're donating specifically to the "Wikimedia board of
>trustees communication and travel fund" or something.

Absolutely. It is very important that people know how their money is
spent. I deeply agree. And we know that donations were done to purchase
*hardware*, because most donations were sent while wiki was broken, and
we made a general call precisely to have new hardware, so no money
donated to pay for server should be used for any other means. This is an
essential point, and I really wish that no one have any doubts about that.

We provide right now transparent money use history. Mav has been
maintaining this for a while now. See

http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_bank_account_history_for_2004

Now, you should also know that Jimbo goes on paying some expenses as
well, such as when a developer goes to the coloc. This is not reported
in the current history.

I think that in the future, we may ask members to indicate if they wish
that their money is used for a specific purpose. Till now, the two
specific purposes were
* hardware
* purchase of a computer for Brion

I see many more. Especially for firms funding. A firm or an organisation
may wish that the donation money is used in a specific way, such as
support of a minority language, or sending computers with wikipedia on
it to an given african country, or making a whole set of wikireaders
around a specific topic. There are many options and to my opinion,
donators should have the possibility to indicate what they want the
money to be used for.

Aside from donations, we also recently received an award (10 000 euros),
and the money from this award may be used the way we choose to use it.
Which mean, we can use it for hardware, or for *anything else*,
including to support costs which will help to build the community.

>This is something I feel somewhat strongly about, especially since
>someone mentioned how other organizations routinely do it: they are
>most definitely not models to emulate. A great many non-profit
>organizations are inefficient, wasteful, and often simply corrupt,
with >a relatively small percentage of their money going towards their
actual >stated mission.

>-Mark

I'd like to be very direct and to cite a very specific example. In about
2 weeks, there is a meeting in Paris, for many french speaking
wikipedians. I will meet Jimbo there. Jimbo made the great suggestion
that Angela meet us there as well. It will allow her to meet with french
wikipedians AND it will probably be the first and the last opportunity
for the whole year, for the board to meet face to face for really low cost.

I think that though most issues may be solved in irc and emails
discussion, it is very highly suitable that the board meets in real life
at least once in the year, and this meeting in Paris is the lowest cost
opportunity to do so. I deeply believe that on-line discussions can be
improved when people have met around a beer once. Hence, I hope Angel
will come to Paris. It will strengthen the community to do so. And I do
not think a project like our own project, does rely ONLY of hardware
considerations; it relies a lot on PEOPLE. And using a bit of money from
the Foundation to strenghten the bonds between people does not seen to
me to be a waste. Many issues can be fixed on face to face meeting, so
that is not inefficiency either. And finally, talking of corruption is
perhaps a bit premature Mark.

The board will be very much what you all wish it to be Mark. So perhaps
this is what we should discuss right now.

We can solve a lot of organisational issues online. If you want us to
be only doing this, that is fine. It has little cost, but for our time
and energy.

However, if the board is also expected to meet people outside, to write
to american administration, to give interviews, to go to major events, I
think paying us the costs of it, the costs for US representing YOU is
not very chocking. And has little to do with corruption.

I'd like to personally add a last point. I am a working woman, so I have
income. However, I am not rich. Far from it. My family has enough to
live quietly. No excess though. Like many many many of you, I chose to
give most of my free time (more than my free time actually) for this
project, because I very strongly believe in it. I am all dedicated to
give my energy to help it and I will.

But it will *not* be to the cost of my family financial stability. That
would be highly unfair to my husband and my children.

I will, and I think any board member, will only be what you expect us to
be. If covering our costs is too controversial, then let it be :-) We'll
do just as with operating costs, we'll remove all these handy little
options in special pages :-)

Cheers

ant/flo

anthere9 at yahoo

Jun 21, 2004, 1:13 AM

Post #7 of 39 (362 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

>This is something I feel somewhat strongly about, especially since
>someone mentioned how other organizations routinely do it: they are
>most definitely not models to emulate. A great many non-profit
>organizations are inefficient, wasteful, and often simply corrupt,
with >a relatively small percentage of their money going towards their
actual >stated mission.

>-Mark

I'd like to be very direct and to cite a very specific example. In about
2 weeks, there is a meeting in Paris, for many french speaking
wikipedians. I will meet Jimbo there. Jimbo made the great suggestion
that Angela meet us there as well. It will allow her to meet with french
wikipedians AND it will probably be the first and the last opportunity
for the whole year, for the board to meet face to face for really low cost.

I think that though most issues may be solved in irc and emails
discussion, it is very highly suitable that the board meets in real life
at least once in the year, and this meeting in Paris is the lowest cost
opportunity to do so. I deeply believe that on-line discussions can be
improved when people have met around a beer once. Hence, I hope Angel
will come to Paris. It will strengthen the community to do so. And I do
not think a project like our own project, does rely ONLY of hardware
considerations; it relies a lot on PEOPLE. And using a bit of money from
the Foundation to strenghten the bonds between people does not seen to
me to be a waste. Many issues can be fixed on face to face meeting, so
that is not inefficiency either. And finally, talking of corruption is
perhaps a bit premature Mark.

---------------------------------

Oh, and... I forgot :-)
Angela feels very strongly about this. And it is important to the board not to do anything that might be highly upset some people. So, Angela will not come to Paris on the Foundation funds if the great majority of participants think it wrong.
However, from irc discussion, I perceive most participants think covering costs is acceptable.

Since this is the first board, nearly everything is to build to make it work properly and efficiently. Angel and I will do the best we can, but only with your help. Obviously, building a good financial basis is the first step. I'd like to remind people to comment and give feedback on the various starting points on meta (see the goings-on for a list of topics).

I think we should keep in mind the goals of the Foundation, which are to support the development of the various projects, as well as the distribution and the use of the accumulated knowledge. "Support" is also about finding funds for the project to work, and this requires to go look where the funds are available (not only to discuss on irc). "Support" is also about meeting with publishers and consider printing options (and this is not only done via email). "Support" is also about making the project known (and this is not only done through the wiki itself). Perhaps "support" is also about lobbying here and there for copyright issues :-)
It is very likely that "support" of development also goes through supporting meetings of tech people, perhaps professional training of the tech team, perhaps paying someone for the maintenance of our server farm. It is also likely that support of the project will require one day paying someone to defend us from a legal perspective, or an accountant when it becomes a full time job.

We are not here yet :-)

But I think most non-profit organization are working at the same time with volunteers and paid staff. They could not function without the volunteers, but they also need the paid staff to guarantee a certain level of professionalism when the organisation gets very big. Does that mean paying people is a waste of money, and that it is not useful to the actual mission ? I do not think so. When a financial officer is spending 8 hours a day taking care of accounting, placing money wisely so to make the best of the resources, I think it is not a loss of money to pay him, and it is more useful to the actual mission than to have no idea of how much money is available, not having a decent budget which allow planification, or just letting bills accumulate to the point of having legal troubles. Of course, we can hope to rely on volunteers to do this as long as possible, but to be honest, I would not expect a volunteer to do that full time for a long time.

Though, just as many of you here, the number of hours I spend on wiki is not far from being a full time already :-)

Is this too premature to talk about it ?
Perhaps
Or perhaps is it planification, long term vision ?

I understand you are worried about lack of efficiency, waste and corruption. It may interest you to know that Dannyisme added to possible official positions, the possibility of having an ombudsman. I personally think it is premature right now, but well....
You are welcome to comment on this anyway.

In any case, stay assured we won't do things community will be strongly opposed to.

Ant

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

engelsAG at t-online

Jun 21, 2004, 1:13 AM

Post #8 of 39 (369 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

"Anthere" <anthere9 [at] yahoo> schrieb:

> I think we should relieve you of your fears with regards to this issue
> Mark :-)
>
> Last evening, we were discussing of how much money was currently in bank.
> I made a quick estimate, because Mav in on holidays, so I could not ask
> him last numbers, but basically I know that mid may we had roughly 5.400
> dollars. Add to this the 9000 dollars refund for a server. Plus 10.000
> euros received a few days ago by Jimbo for the trophy.
>
> That makes about 24 000 dollars (it is a *very* rough estimate).
>
> JeLuF made a provisional hardware budget for the rest of the year.
> You may find it here :
> http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_provisional_budget
> Current amount indicated is 12000 dollars

I read this, and it looks very much underestimated to me.
The total database size of all Wikipedias is growing even slightly more
than exponentially, doubling time at the moment being six months.
Wikipedia's own usage statistics are not very clear, but in as far as
they are, they have increased more than tenfold in the past year. Alexa
tells us that our reach has grown 37% in three months time.

All this draws me to the conclusion: The amount of hardware we need
at the end of the year might easily be double what we need now. And
since we grow faster than Moore's law, we will NOT get by with keeping
the same amount of hardware or growing linearly. Add to that that at
the moment we do not have everything we want (there's well-known
regulars now who have no f***ing idea what the Maintenance Page is
for or what the Wikipedia search results look like).

I'm afraid that this kind of estimates, and Wikipedia hardware buys
in general, are often based on what would be comfortable now rather
than on what will be needed by the time the hardware actually arrives,
or even better, when the hardware _after that_ arrives.

Andre Engels

anthere9 at yahoo

Jun 21, 2004, 1:27 AM

Post #9 of 39 (363 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Andre Engels <engelsAG [at] t-online> wrote:
"Anthere" schrieb:

> I think we should relieve you of your fears with regards to this issue
> Mark :-)
>
> Last evening, we were discussing of how much money was currently in bank.
> I made a quick estimate, because Mav in on holidays, so I could not ask
> him last numbers, but basically I know that mid may we had roughly 5.400
> dollars. Add to this the 9000 dollars refund for a server. Plus 10.000
> euros received a few days ago by Jimbo for the trophy.
>
> That makes about 24 000 dollars (it is a *very* rough estimate).
>
> JeLuF made a provisional hardware budget for the rest of the year.
> You may find it here :
> http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_provisional_budget
> Current amount indicated is 12000 dollars

I read this, and it looks very much underestimated to me.
The total database size of all Wikipedias is growing even slightly more
than exponentially, doubling time at the moment being six months.
Wikipedia's own usage statistics are not very clear, but in as far as
they are, they have increased more than tenfold in the past year. Alexa
tells us that our reach has grown 37% in three months time.

All this draws me to the conclusion: The amount of hardware we need
at the end of the year might easily be double what we need now. And
since we grow faster than Moore's law, we will NOT get by with keeping
the same amount of hardware or growing linearly. Add to that that at
the moment we do not have everything we want (there's well-known
regulars now who have no f***ing idea what the Maintenance Page is
for or what the Wikipedia search results look like).

I'm afraid that this kind of estimates, and Wikipedia hardware buys
in general, are often based on what would be comfortable now rather
than on what will be needed by the time the hardware actually arrives,
or even better, when the hardware _after that_ arrives.

Andre Engels

-----

Yo.
Please update the hardware requirement page. Best thing the dev team can do is to tell what they think will be needed in the coming months, so an accurate budget may be set, and funds be available when there is need.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!

beesley at gmail

Jun 21, 2004, 1:48 AM

Post #10 of 39 (363 views)
Permalink

Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

hcheney wrote:
> If the Wikimedia Foundation starts giving the trustees
> "perks" I feel that fundraising could be quite a bit
> harder.

Firstly, phone calls made for Foundation business are hardly "perks".
Secondly, I don't see this sort of expense coming out of the normal
donation funds. People have given those expecting they will be used on
hardware and related purchases, so that is exactly what should be done
with them.

However, not all of the money in our account is from donors. We
already have €10,000 from the Ars Electronica award, and one of the
things Anthere and I plan to do over the coming year is to find funds
from alternative sources. We can't rely purely on donations from
within the website, so there is no need for actual donor money to be
spent on board expenses.

I expect the vast majority of our communication to be carried out over
IRC. However, there are situations where this is not plausible. As
well as the press contacts Anthere mentioned, applying for grants is
one example where face to face contact, or at a minimum, phone
contact, is far more likely to result in success.

Delirium wrote:
> As for internet connections, I assume anyone involved
> in the project already has one …

I agree. I don't see my internet costs as being something the
Foundation should be paying for.

Anthere wrote:
> In about 2 weeks, there is a meeting in Paris, for many french speaking
> wikipedians. I will meet Jimbo there. Jimbo made the great suggestion
> that Angela meet us there as well. It will allow her to meet with french
> wikipedians AND it will probably be the first and the last opportunity
> for the whole year, for the board to meet face to face for really low cost.

I have mixed views about this. It is a great opportunity for the three
of us to meet, and probably the only opportunity over the following
year. However, I am not entirely comfortable about having to take the
Foundation's money for it, as Jimbo has suggested I do. On the other
hand, I recognise that starting the year with a real life meeting is
likely to be very beneficial, so if the community supported the idea
that some of the award money (not donor money) could pay for this,
then I would be delighted by that. However, I absolutely do not want
this to happen if it is going to cause a huge controversy. People have
expressed views against board expenses, and so this issue needs to be
treated sensitively. I have no intention of upsetting the people who
so recently voted me into this position.

Anthere wrote:
> Danny added to possible official positions,
> the possibility of having an ombudsman.
> I personally think it is premature right now…

I don't think this is premature at all. I think it will ease a lot of
the concerns surrounding the idea we're about to jet off to Florida
each week. :) Having an outsider monitoring the spending within the
project sounds a very beneficial idea to me.

Angela.

andrew.lih at gmail

Jun 21, 2004, 1:51 AM

Post #11 of 39 (365 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

I propose Wikimedia Founcation fund travel for this first convening of
Jimbo and the newly elected trustees Anthere and Angela. As Ant said,
it is rare to have folks in such local proximity, and this is a cost
effective way to take advantage of it.

It is standard for Trustees to be compensated for travel to convene
Board meetings, and this would be exactly that. This should not be
construed to endorse the other things discussed recently, such as
phone calls, broadband, etc. That should be decided with full careful
discussion.

However, having served on boards of other US-based nonprofits, paying
expenses for convening Board of Trustees is a normal practice. I hope
it can be agreed upon rather quickly that laying out this expense of
less than 400 euros is money well spent.

-Andrew Lih (User:Fuzheado)

brion at pobox

Jun 21, 2004, 1:57 AM

Post #12 of 39 (367 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Anthere wrote:
> I think that in the future, we may ask members to indicate if they wish
> that their money is used for a specific purpose. Till now, the two
> specific purposes were
> * hardware
> * purchase of a computer for Brion

I'd just like to point out that no Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. funds went
to the purchase of my PowerBook (which has been a big help in browser
compatibility testing, and I've fixed a number of icky wiki bugs during
my commute thanks to having it!)

Rather, I have a separate personal donation page (predating the
Wikimedia fund drive, I think) through which a number of very kind
people have kicked in a few bucks now and then, including a generous
personal donation by Jimbo. (Thanks again to all who helped!) I haven't
taken any wiki-related money that wasn't sent directly to me by the donor.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.25 KB)

anthere9 at yahoo

Jun 21, 2004, 2:42 AM

Post #13 of 39 (364 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Brion Vibber <brion [at] pobox> wrote:
Anthere wrote:
> I think that in the future, we may ask members to indicate if they wish
> that their money is used for a specific purpose. Till now, the two
> specific purposes were
> * hardware
> * purchase of a computer for Brion

I'd just like to point out that no Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. funds went
to the purchase of my PowerBook (which has been a big help in browser
compatibility testing, and I've fixed a number of icky wiki bugs during
my commute thanks to having it!)

Rather, I have a separate personal donation page (predating the
Wikimedia fund drive, I think) through which a number of very kind
people have kicked in a few bucks now and then, including a generous
personal donation by Jimbo. (Thanks again to all who helped!) I haven't
taken any wiki-related money that wasn't sent directly to me by the donor.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

------------------

Yup, correct. Sorry, my text was not strictly accurately written.
Other developers have such links suggesting donations. I think I saw one on Erik user page as well.

Actually, if you go on wikimediafoundation.org donation page, it is mentionned we could pay you part time with the funds Brion, and there is still a link there, suggesting to donate to the Brion Vibber notebook computer fund :-)

http://wikimediafoundation.org/fundraising

We can do such things, like adding on the donation page, a collection of links for various purposes, such as Brion notebook
or we can have it all get in the foundation funds, and use these funds according to the purpose for which they were given.
Opinions ? Legal issues ?

I do not need funding to go to Paris. I planned to get there anyway, whatever the results of the elections, just to meet with the french speaking people.

I am glad we convinced Jimbo to come and I will be even happier if Angel comes.

This travel will be optimised, as I will meet on saturday the 3rd, some people currently doing a CD Rom on sustainable development. They are willing to give us under gfdl part of their content, but want to meet first to discuss which content will be transfered, and how. Looxix will come to that meeting as well.

Aside from the content consideration, which will be great, I see this as an important move for the french wikipedia, and perhaps a step in a direction which will bring funds when the french association will be created :-)

This content donation was suggested by Bruno Oudet, who I met in Lyon, during a meeting in may. You may find a cv of Bruno Oudet here : http://web.archive.org/web/20030501121123/www-leibniz.imag.fr/SI/index.php?page=cvbo. I believe this person might help us further penetrate the french information network, but this very likely imply "meeting" him again in other circonstances.

ant

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.

yann at forget-me

Jun 21, 2004, 2:53 AM

Post #14 of 39 (365 views)
Permalink

Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Hi,

Le Monday 21 June 2004 11:42, Anthere a �crit :
> I am glad we convinced Jimbo to come and I will be even happier if Angel
> comes.

I think it's fine if the fundation pays Angela's travel expenses to Paris.

> This travel will be optimised, as I will meet on saturday the 3rd, some
> people currently doing a CD Rom on sustainable development. They are
> willing to give us under gfdl part of their content, but want to meet first
> to discuss which content will be transfered, and how. Looxix will come to
> that meeting as well.
>
> Aside from the content consideration, which will be great, I see this as an
> important move for the french wikipedia, and perhaps a step in a direction
> which will bring funds when the french association will be created :-)
>
> This content donation was suggested by Bruno Oudet, who I met in Lyon,
> during a meeting in may. You may find a cv of Bruno Oudet here :
> http://web.archive.org/web/20030501121123/www-leibniz.imag.fr/SI/index.php?
>page=cvbo. I believe this person might help us further penetrate the french
> information network, but this very likely imply "meeting" him again in
> other circonstances.

I have to add that it's Bruno Oudet who invited me to present Wikipedia to a
meeting on "sharing information on the Internet" last January. He was also
present during the presentation I made last May in Aix-en-Provence, in south
of France.

So there is no doubt that his contributions will be helpful to the project.

> ant

Yann

--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop�die libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux

anthere9 at yahoo

Jun 21, 2004, 4:11 AM

Post #15 of 39 (367 views)
Permalink

Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

I think it will ease a lot of
the concerns surrounding the idea we're about to jet off to Florida
each week. :)

We will not do that ? Jeeee... I am disappointed ;-)

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!

e.p.zachte at chello

Jun 21, 2004, 5:00 AM

Post #16 of 39 (363 views)
Permalink

Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Anthere wrote
"though I tried to suggest a couple of journalists to connect to irc or only
use emails, I really do not understand why they strongly insist on phone
meeting or better, face to face meetings"

I suppose journalists then meet you at a place that is convenient for you.
They are used to travel and send the bill to their employer.

Perhaps you just ment it to be an example of how external relations have
their own dynamics.

Anthere wrote
"Jimbo made the great suggestion that Angela meet us there [Paris] as well.
It will allow her to meet with french
wikipedians AND it will probably be the first and the last opportunity for
the whole year, for the board to meet face to face for really low cost."

Does 'the board' now mean the three active members by default :) ?

In my own experience communicating only through (e)mail about sensitive
affairs is a risky business. People easily misinterpretate the message.
Emoticons are a meagre tool for building interpersonal relations. Correcting
misunderstandings takes time, if they are recognized as such at all. It is
quite possible that the board will have to discuss sensitive matters
sometime or another. So to me paying Angelas' trip to Paris is worthwile.

I believe it is indeed customary for volunteer organisations to cover
expenses. I also believe lots of wellfare organisations have a sliding scale
over time for what is appropriate in this matter. In the Netherlands there
was a huge uproar recently when the media disclosed that the president of
the Dutch Heart Disease foundation earned more than our prime minister
(volunteers for the organisation went on strike). I'm not a bit afraid
things will turn in this direction at all, it is just an extreme example
that makes a nice story, but there are many examples of wellfare orgs with
large overhead costs and it makes peoples discomfort with a blank check
understandable.

So maybe we could agree on a budget for representational costs. I'm sure if
people can visit a page where board members log activities like external
contacts and results together with major expenses (not every phone call),
trust that this is money well spent will build. By the way other wikipedians
may engage in similar activities, Erik Moeller already has a semi official
role that comes close to this. How do we deal with that?

Maybe we should continue the discussion on meta where a vote could be held,
first on Angelas trip then on the wider issues.

Summing up, I think covering expenses to let the board do a good job is only
fair.

Erik Zachte

delirium at hackish

Jun 21, 2004, 8:28 AM

Post #17 of 39 (363 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Andrew Lih wrote:

>It is standard for Trustees to be compensated for travel to convene
>Board meetings, and this would be exactly that. This should not be
>construed to endorse the other things discussed recently, such as
>phone calls, broadband, etc. That should be decided with full careful
>discussion.
>
>However, having served on boards of other US-based nonprofits, paying
>expenses for convening Board of Trustees is a normal practice. I hope
>it can be agreed upon rather quickly that laying out this expense of
>less than 400 euros is money well spent.
>
>
I don't think it'd be money well-spent, and the fact that other US-based
nonprofits do not spend their money wisely (a well-known fact, that
occasionally results in some public outrage in specific egregious
instances) isn't really a good justification for it.

If I were to think of what we should spend money on that we're not
spending money on, there's a million things that are better options.
The immediate one is some sort of bounty system to pay for software
improvements or configuration improvements that are beyond the scope or
interest of the people doing our so-far-volunteer development work. As
someone mentioned on the wiki-tech list recently, throwing more hardware
at the problem isn't always the best solution, although we do also
undoubtedly need more hardware (and will need even more by the end of
the year).

So if we're going to start spending money on various things, I'd propose
the first thing we do with a spare 400 euro is identify four important
software changes that need to be made, and put bounties on 100 euro on
each of them.

-Mark

delirium at hackish

Jun 21, 2004, 8:34 AM

Post #18 of 39 (372 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Sort of to follow up on the last email in more general terms:

* I don't disagree that, ideally, we would provide a small amount of
funding to the foundation members for specific purposes.
* However, I also think we should provide a small amount of funding to
our software developers, who have done a lot more over the past few
years (and currently) to make Wikipedia what it is, and need more
resources to continue doing so at the same rate (or, ideally, an
improved rate).

So, I'd say funding for such niceties as face-to-face board meetings
should take place only after the developers have the money they need,
which may include hiring additional developers for specific areas in
which we have no sufficiently knowledgeable volunteers, or at least
putting in place a bounty system to attract some semi-paid developers.
I could easily see EUR1000-2000 in the immediate future being very
desirable for this purpose.

-Mark

epzachte at chello

Jun 21, 2004, 8:47 AM

Post #19 of 39 (363 views)
Permalink

Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Delirium wrote:

"I'd propose the first thing we do with a spare 400 euro is identify four important
software changes that need to be made, and put bounties on 100 euro on each of them."

Doiny any serious programming for $100 is almost equivalent to doing it for free. What incentive would that be?

If we would pay serious money for any software activity our current cash reserves would be gone in no time.
At the moment developers are rewarded with an occasional 'thank you'. Singling out tasks that are important
enough to pay a token sum, would only muddy the waters.

Erik Zachte

andrew.lih at gmail

Jun 21, 2004, 9:03 AM

Post #20 of 39 (363 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

> Delirium said:
> So, I'd say funding for such niceties as face-to-face board meetings
> should take place only after the developers have the money they need,
> which may include hiring additional developers for specific areas in
> which we have no sufficiently knowledgeable volunteers, or at least
> putting in place a bounty system to attract some semi-paid developers.
> I could easily see EUR1000-2000 in the immediate future being very
> desirable for this purpose.

Delirum, we've spent a *lot* more money and resources on software
development and server hardware than we have on planning and strategy
for fundraising, which would immediately benefit if we got Jimbo, Ant
and Ang together.

I had the pleasure of meeting Ang in person in London and she had
great ideas and energy about fundraising in areas we are currently
neglecting. I also enjoyed a long lunch with Jimbo the day after the
London get together, and we exchanged ideas and thoughts about
Wikimedia in ways we never could have by email. I can only imagine
the great synergy that will arise to get the board members in the same
room.

Virtual collaboration is wonderful. It's what makes Wikipedia so
great. But you also need face to face contact for folks who are
putting in so much time and effort to work with Wikimedia's future.
We should not be so stingy about investing in our human capital.

-Andrew Lih (User:Fuzheado)

anthere9 at yahoo

Jun 21, 2004, 9:08 AM

Post #21 of 39 (364 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Delirium <delirium [at] hackish> wrote:
Andrew Lih wrote:

>It is standard for Trustees to be compensated for travel to convene
>Board meetings, and this would be exactly that. This should not be
>construed to endorse the other things discussed recently, such as
>phone calls, broadband, etc. That should be decided with full careful
>discussion.
>
>However, having served on boards of other US-based nonprofits, paying
>expenses for convening Board of Trustees is a normal practice. I hope
>it can be agreed upon rather quickly that laying out this expense of
>less than 400 euros is money well spent.
>
>
I don't think it'd be money well-spent, and the fact that other US-based
nonprofits do not spend their money wisely (a well-known fact, that
occasionally results in some public outrage in specific egregious
instances) isn't really a good justification for it.

If I were to think of what we should spend money on that we're not
spending money on, there's a million things that are better options.
The immediate one is some sort of bounty system to pay for software
improvements or configuration improvements that are beyond the scope or
interest of the people doing our so-far-volunteer development work. As
someone mentioned on the wiki-tech list recently, throwing more hardware
at the problem isn't always the best solution, although we do also
undoubtedly need more hardware (and will need even more by the end of
the year).

So if we're going to start spending money on various things, I'd propose
the first thing we do with a spare 400 euro is identify four important
software changes that need to be made, and put bounties on 100 euro on
each of them.

-Mark

----------------------

In considering paying developers to stimulate them to work more, while covering our costs is seen by you as a complete loss of money with no good foreseeable justification, you are being plain rude to both Angela and I.

If we are to use our energy, our time and now even our personal money on this project, I think we can expect perhaps a little bit of politness, recognition and appreciation for the work we do.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!

delirium at hackish

Jun 21, 2004, 9:23 AM

Post #22 of 39 (364 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Andrew Lih wrote:

>Delirum, we've spent a *lot* more money and resources on software
>development and server hardware than we have on planning and strategy
>for fundraising, which would immediately benefit if we got Jimbo, Ant
>and Ang together.
>
>
Actually, we have not currently spent *any* money on software
development, unless you count money that people individually donated to
Brion (which did not pass through the Wikimedia Foundation).

-Mark

delirium at hackish

Jun 21, 2004, 9:24 AM

Post #23 of 39 (372 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

Anthere wrote:

> In considering paying developers to stimulate them to work more,
> while covering our costs is seen by you as a complete loss of
> money with no good foreseeable justification, you are being plain
> rude to both Angela and I.
>
> If we are to use our energy, our time and now even our personal
> money on this project, I think we can expect perhaps a little bit
> of politness, recognition and appreciation for the work we do.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

I did not say it had no possible justification, merely that paying
developers ought to be a higher priority. The developers have spent a
lot more of their energy, time, and personal money on the project, over
the course of several *years*. Beginning to reimburse board members who
have hardly served for a *week* does not seem even remotely in the same
range.

-Mark

andrew.lih at gmail

Jun 21, 2004, 10:04 AM

Post #24 of 39 (363 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

I don't understand why one groups needs to be paid *first*, precluding
expenditures for others. Even if one agrees with your assertion that
developers should be monetarily compensated, that does not mean the
board should work in poverty.

It's quite short sighted if one cannot see that Ang/Ant/Jimbo putting
their heads together would do well for our fundraising which will in
turn raise more funds for the entire project.

-Andrew Lih (User:Fuzheado)

PS: And you've certainly entered "rude" territory by belittling Ant
and Ang's extensive contributions to Wikipedia so flippantly.

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:24:49 -0500, Delirium <delirium [at] hackish> wrote:
>
> Anthere wrote:
>
> > In considering paying developers to stimulate them to work more,
> > while covering our costs is seen by you as a complete loss of
> > money with no good foreseeable justification, you are being plain
> > rude to both Angela and I.
> >
> > If we are to use our energy, our time and now even our personal
> > money on this project, I think we can expect perhaps a little bit
> > of politness, recognition and appreciation for the work we do.
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I did not say it had no possible justification, merely that paying
> developers ought to be a higher priority. The developers have spent a
> lot more of their energy, time, and personal money on the project, over
> the course of several *years*. Beginning to reimburse board members who
> have hardly served for a *week* does not seem even remotely in the same
> range.

maveric149 at yahoo

Jun 21, 2004, 10:05 AM

Post #25 of 39 (363 views)
Permalink

Re: Funding for the newly elected Board Members [In reply to]

--- epzachte [at] chello wrote:
> Doiny any serious programming for $100 is almost equivalent to doing it for
> free. What incentive would that be?
>
> If we would pay serious money for any software activity our current cash
> reserves would be gone in no time.
> At the moment developers are rewarded with an occasional 'thank you'.
> Singling out tasks that are important
> enough to pay a token sum, would only muddy the waters.

Why not just provide direct links to the PayPal accounts of every active
developer who has contributed x amount of code on the Foundation's fundraising
page? Kinda like a tip jar. I was planning on asking the developers about this
soon anyway.

And/or we could also have a separate software development PayPal account that
we could offer bounties from (the current PayPal account would be for general
fund expenses - mostly server related). On top of that, we could have a legal
defense fund account as well.

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads