On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:44 AM, rupert THURNER <rupert.thurner(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Chris Keating
<chriskeatingwiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The registration form will definitely include an option to
donate
> some money for the scholarships fund. There
was a substantial interest
in
this
option.
Good idea! It might also be a good move to make this kind of donation
possible for people who don't register.
uuh - i am not sure if one should open that can of worms. what is the
purpose of wikimania? is it to raise money? for sure not. there are
more intelligent ways to do that. is wikimania a business, i.e. the
organizer want to get as much money out of the conference as possible?
for sure not. there are other conference topics which are more
promising.
If there is interest by participants to chip in on scholarships for others
to attend, I'm not sure providing an outlet for that interest means opening
any cans, full of worms or other critters. It's an efficient matching of
donor interest to funding needed.
imo we should clearly focus everything we do towards
the
core mission. if wikimania is not serving this mission, than we
probably do not need wikimania. if we need more money for wikimania,
use the established banner. if we want to have topic bound donations,
then use the banner and let the user choose the topic important to
her.
This presumes that the banner actually reaches everyone who might be
inclined to donate. I find that presumption unfounded, particularly in the
context for Wikimania which may very well attract potential donors that
would either not be engaged by banners or not even see any (perhaps because
he's an Armenian Wikibookian).
Furthermore, this apprach provides a severe disconnect between the
opportunity to donate (i.e. the annual online campaign) and the salient
incentive to do so (i.e. signing up for Wikimania and noticing there's a
financial need to allow others to participate). Why would this be more
effective?
personally i do not think "financial
diversity" will do any good to
the reputation of the wikimedia movement. the wikipedia website is one
of the most prominent in the world. i am perceiving a site banner to
donate money ok. all other means to raise money i find unacceptable
and damaging the reputation. because we are perceived as "competitor"
- and this is not what we want to be. imo we should really strive to
have clear and consistent picture to the outside world which is not
"consistently begging for money on every possibility we see". we want
to be enabler so more persons find ways to support our goals.
I'm having a lot of difficulty understanding the reasoning here. This may
be language-related, I don't know. In general, however, it's best practice
for non-profit organizations/charities to be very open and clear about the
fact that they are indeed pursuing a charitable purpose and that they are
dependent on the support from donors. Fundraising is about building
relationships with people that lead to support for the cause pursued,
whether that's financial, material, political, or anything else really.
Allowing people to provide that support the easiest, most convenient way at
the most salient moments is an essential part of that. So providing that
opportunity at Wikimania registration can only be applauded.
i am aware as WMUK needs to go begging for money at
WMF is
automatically triggering such ideas. and i probably would have similar
ideas in case i would be WMUK. the solution is to fix the money flow.
the income needs to come to an organisation as close to the donor as
possible so a donor can walk over and slap the receiver in case of
inefficiency.
Isn't this sort of contradictory to your earlier statement? While I would
object to the language of "slapping" anyone really, allowing Wikimedia
participants to donate to conference scholarships at time of registration
is about as close a connection between donation and use as possible. Using
the annual online campaign for Wikimania-specifc fundraising is rather the
opposite.
I would also object to the term "begging". No one is "begging" for
money,
neither the foundation from (potential) donors nor chapters from the
foundation. It's a hugely loaded term that denigrates fundraising without
actually saying much.
Cheers,
Sebastian Moleski
Schatzmeister / Treasurer
-------------------------------------
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24
10963 Berlin
Telefon 030 - 219 158 26-0
www.wikimedia.de
Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
http://spenden.wikimedia.de/
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.