Hoi, Who says the WMF is not doing its best to achieve the amount of money that is mentioned in our budget ? Do you really not think people will be upset when projects are shelved until better times arrive ?
Fraud has really negative implications. Suggesting that the budget is misleading and fraudulent can get you and the WMF in serious problems. Thanks, GerardM
On Nov 18, 2007 7:34 AM, Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com wrote:
On Nov 17, 2007 7:54 PM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Nov 17, 2007 5:04 PM, GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, As I am of the opinion that there is a causal relation, and as I am
equally
allowed to express my opinion, I can and do blame. When you are of the opinion that this is not nice. Well, it only proves that it is not a
zero
sum game. I hope we will get enough money to cover the budget if not
their
will necessarily be cuts.
The budget wasn't met last time either, was it? Looking back it seems like less than half the budget was raised during the entire fiscal year, and the foundation only spent about half of that ($1.4 million raised, only 0.7 million in expenses).
These supposed budgets look completely unrealistic to me. I assumed that was intentional. Ask for way more than you need, and then settle for half that. It's a common strategy.
One can pad the budget with programs that you might hope to pursue if there was enough money, but you can't simply inflate the numbers for no reason. Soliciting donations with a budget you know is misleading constitutes fraud. I'd like to assume that the $4.6M in "planned spending" is not so ridiculous that it would still be reasonable to have less than $1.5M in fundraiser income.
-Robert Rohde _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l