[Foundation-l] Expert board members - a suggestion

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/8/28 Gregory Kohs <thekohser at gmail.com>:
> Thomas Dalton asked:
>
> "Has tech money been spent on other things previously? That is news to me."
>
> For your edification, Thomas, since at least you seem willing to listen, as
> opposed to some others here who simply "tut tut" at all the "trolling" and
> the "time wasting" any critics might have to offer:
>
> http://philanthropy.com/giveandtake/article/858/wikipedias-fund-raising-success-questioned
>
> Please make sure to read my comment there, which references this document:

Your comment there (I didn't read all of it, I prefer to limit the
time I spent reading people whine) seem to be mainly complaining about
the salaries paid to WMF management. Compared to people doing similar
jobs elsewhere, their compensation is decidedly modest.

> Anthony's not exactly being fair, though, when he sort of suggests that the
> shortfall in Technology spending went instead to the Executive Director.  As
> far as I can tell, it went into the bank, to be spent in the FOLLOWING YEARS
> on the Executive Director's need to expand staff to unprecedented levels.

I think most of the tech underspend was due to spending being
deferred. That money will still be spent on tech. Are you objecting to
WMF expansion? I think the fact that the WMF can sustain a larger
staff is a good thing, it will allow them to do much more.

> Pay attention, Thomas.  I've discussed this issue in many places.  On the
> Wikimedia-controlled places, I'm often censored or blocked, but there are
> plenty of other non-WMF venues where facts can be laid out for the curious
> to learn the truth:
>
> http://www.mywikibiz.com/Top_10_Reasons_Not_to_Donate_to_Wikipedia

I think you mean "Truth", with a capital 'T'. I've never been
interested in learning the Truth.