-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
I was sent this. I don't know what to do of it.
* * *
"Due to a large amount of spam, emails from non-members of this list are now automatically rejected. If you have a valuable contribution to the list but would rather not subscribe to it, please send an email to foundation-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org and we will forward your post to the list. Please be aware that all messages to this list are archived and viewable for the public. If you have a confidential communication to make, please rather email info@wikimedia.org
Thank you."
Please forward my message to the public.
Cyrano, back earlier
Message follows:
However we could encourage donations by having a static page that is
part of the UI of each project that prominently lists everyone who has donated to WMF. e.g.
-- John Vandenberg
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Forgive me if I enter this conversation without reading the last hundreds of mails, but I see we are talking about 'sponsorship, yes or no ?' here.
A recurrent question my good sirs. Who is pushing it this time? Who is expecting a lot of money from it? Because there is a lot of money to make from the 6th site of the world. Did the foundation explained it to you? Do we have a problem with the current fund raising model and campaign. Do we have big sudden urgent monetary need?
I thought we didn't.
I thought that Wikipedia and Wikimedia were non-profit projects. So why are we even discussing sponsorship? Have we any financial problem? Do we want to allow rich organizations to start casting their monetary vote into what we should do? Shouldn't we remain stoically independent by receiving only voluntary donations and voluntary efforts from good wills guided by universal principles?
Is there a consensus from the Foundation about this? I'd like a quick and honest answer from each of the member. Is it acceptable to accept money from organizations like Virgins which pursues lucre before "free knowledge for anybody"?
I firmly vote no until I have a full understanding of the financial need of risking the financial autonomy of wikimedian projects.
And I'm quite alarmed to be discussing this.
Cyrano, back from the moon. - --------
PD: Will the next step be signing contracts where we allow Virgins to say "buy the last cd of [insert star name here] and support Wikipedia!" "Yes! Virgin supports Wikipedia! Virgin loves knowledge. Virgins thinks, with a tear in the eyes, that any kid should have the right to education, damn it!. Virgin is your friend, see? So each time you buy a CD, Virgins "Unite" (we though at first Virgins IsYourFriend but we we're told we were too obvious) gives one cent to the big encyclopedia online that everybody shares! See? Look at our logo on their site! LOOK AT IT MY SWEET CHILD, AND BUY MY PRODUCTS!
Oh boy, I can't wait too see it in its full splendor now that we catched the tail of the devil.