On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86(a)comcast.net>wrote;wrote:
Yes, Nathan, please answer Steve's question; because it is my question as
well. Just what exactly are these "long-term goals" that would require an
increased, steady source of funds?
Any long term goals require a steady source of funds. People are fickle with
donation
money, and relying on individual donors for the duration is not sound
policy. If we
want the Foundation to exist and be relevant in 20 or 40 years, then it
needs a way
to meet its spending needs without relying on the charitable giving climate.
I and others have written lists of worthwhile tasks that the Foundation
could perform
if it had the money, in the times that the advertising issue has been
discussed previously
on this list. Since you were both subscribed to the list at that time, there
seems to be
no reason to rehash it. Even if you completely forgot and are unable to
search for the
last thread on your own, I'm sure you are imaginative enough to come up with
one or two
things that would significantly further the goals of the Foundation but
require more and
more regular funding than it currently has.
Nathan