[Foundation-l] Report from Frankfurt - October 2006

[daniwo59 at aol.com]

Actually, we have always had them. As a not fo profit in the United States,  
we are required to have a mission statement, because we are accepting  money. 
People have a right to know what they are giving money to, and that is  laid 
out in the mission statement. 
 
For instance, Wikimedia cannot decide to spend 100,000 euros on  sending food 
to Darfur because--even though it is a worthy cause--it lies  outside the 
scope of our mission. This helps to ensure to our donors that the  money they 
give us us used specifically for the development and spread of free  
content/knowledge.
 
Danny
 
In a message dated 10/29/2006 6:48:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
geniice at gmail.com writes:

On  10/29/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax at gmail.com>  wrote:
> geni wrote:
> > On 10/29/06, Michael Snow  <wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> For example, we worked  on drafting a formal
> >> vision and mission statement
>  >
> > Why?
> >
>
>  Because.
>

The problem is that that is what I'm rather worried  the answer would
be. We appear to have got on okay without one and I tend  to feel that
haveing one would risk giving rule lawyers more  aminition.


--  
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l  mailing  list
foundation-l at wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l