On 3/4/08, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Any idea where Danny got that idea from? Is it purely imagination, or was there some wine incident?
As geni pointed out, he did not actually make that claim. His blog entry is carefully constructed to do the maximum damage to the reputation of the Foundation and to Jimmy Wales personally, without making many (any?) actionable, specific claims. (Not that legal action against trash blogs would actually be a good idea -- it only gives them the attention that they seek.)
Generally speaking, at the time when Jimmy was essentially still running the Foundation, the organization was tiny (first employee in 2005) and didn't have the kinds of reimbursement procedures and controls you'd expect, so what'd happen is that Jimmy would scribble "Wikia" on a receipt, or maybe lose it entirely. Then there would be some back and forth about what it meant, etc. When anything was in doubt, Jimmy would write the Foundation a check later to make sure everything was fully covered. In fact, he hasn't claimed many expenses which would be perfectly reasonable.
Organizations aren't born with benefits packages, financial controls, and reimbursement policies; they develop them over time. Wikimedia is now under professional management, and these matters are handled as you would expect, with expense sheets, travel policies, a requirement for receipts or other documentation, and so forth. But back in the day, they weren't. It doesn't take a lot of creative energy to use the inherent messiness of a young start-up organization as the basis for making outrageous claims, and it takes, frankly, a lot of time and energy to undo the damage caused.