I disagree, it *is* fair to postpone projects for the good of and to insure
the longevity of the organization as a whole. Otherwise, the effects of
these projects will be short-lived.
Cbrown1023
-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Anthony
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 9:42 AM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] [announcement] new staff member in
businessdevelopment
On 5/20/07, GerardM <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi,
What Anthony conveniently forgets is how we are going to pay for it all.
Pay for what? The stuff that's being done now? Donations are going
to pay for it. For giving a datafeed to anyone in the world? The
people receiving the datafeeds will pay for it.
Imagine being able to get cheap or even free hosting on a multi-user
server which has a live datafeed. Toolserver has given us a glimpse
of the possibilites, now imagine if thousands of people had shell
access.
Yes, we want to get as much expose our data in as many
ways as possible.
That is something we agree on. Fact is that the WMF is underfunded, it
could
do much more if it had money to act on its
convictions.
Underfunded/overfunded is relative, but I do agree with you that the
WMF could do much more if it had more money. But it's not fair to
artificially restrict current projects in order to get that money.
Anthony
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l