2009/8/29 Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org>rg>:
I'd personally place myself on the "objecting
to WMF expansion" side, at
least in general sentiment. With larger organizations, you can indeed do
more, but also run more risks. In particular, organizations with large
staffs run the risk of bureaucratization; and community/volunteer-based
organizations with large staffs risk capture of the overall project by
the official organization, rather than the community and volunteers they
ostensibly act as support staff for.
It's not inevitable the outcomes will be bad, but it's worth thinking
about, I think, especially as the track record of traditional non-profit
organizations overall is quite poor in that department.
Those are certainly risks that should not be ignored. I think so far
we've done pretty well on that front and I am optimistic that we will
continue to do so (the community will simply not allow the WMF to
capture the projects). We mustn't be complacent, though - only by
keeping a close eye on things can we avoid them heading off in the
wrong direction. If we do allow things to go wrong it will be
difficult to get back on track.