Why ? And, what does maturity have to do with that ?

1. It should be made clear that travel must be approved in advance before arrangements are made, in addition to the post-travel approval of expense reports.

Florence Devouard wrote: Lots of bureaucracy for a quite uncertain benefit. If a person travelling for WMF provides expenses not fitting with

policy, he can reimburse afterwards. If the case is borderline,

be discussed afterwards and case clarified.

On 7/9/07, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com> wrote: Are you seriously comparing cats to children and other dependents? Focusing on children: In my opinion, a mature organisation recognises that there are persons (I don't say "women", I say "persons", incl. men) who have children to look after but nevertheless want to have a job / have a career / work in a NGO. You basically state "If you have children and can't pay a babysitter, you shouldn't be allowed to be a board member" and I consider this to be rather an affront and a quite out-of-time opinion. Michael _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Are you seriously comparing cats to children and other dependents? Focusing on children: In my opinion, a mature organisation recognises that there are persons (I don't say "women", I say "persons", incl. men) who have children to look after but nevertheless want to have a job / have a career / work in a NGO. You basically state "If you have children and can't pay a babysitter, you shouldn't be allowed to be a board member" and I consider this to be rather an affront and a quite out-of-time opinion.

Because Dependent care is not the responsibility of the foundation's expenses. There is a reason why other boards do not do this. If one is volunteering one's time as a board member, the volunteer is making a decision for themselves to give up that time. They must weigh that decision carefully against their own personal needs. If I were a board member, for instance, it would be incredibly unreasonable for me to ask for reimbursement for boarding, care, and feeding of my cats while I was gone. It was my decision to get the cats, and the assumption of responsibility is my own. Similarly, the decision to be on the board would also be my own, and therefore the foundation would not be beholden to the care of my cats. It's the same thing with dependents... if you cannot afford to keep care of them in the execution of ones duties, then do not sit on the board. On Jul 9, 2007, at 11:59 AM, Florence Devouard wrote: Not uncertain benefit: quite certain benefit. In any major organization, for profit or not, you cannot just say "I want to go here" without having the travel itself approved first. This significantly cuts down on irresponsible costs...There is plenty of travel that a foundation employee COULD go on and be reimbursed for, but does not NEED TO go on. If you want to travel some place you should be prepared to justify first why you are going there, and then once it's approved for you to go there, then you start discussion on how to minimize costs in transit. i.e. if there is a meeting for say free software that is really not all that important, and closely proceeds a major event, such as Wikimania, or a major annual open source/free software convention, it's not necessary to go to the first one. Similarly, there is no reason for every single member of the staff AND board to attend most events. The Uninvited Co., Inc wrote: the this can In all the boards I have been involved with, either having sat on or been an employee thereof, all of them have required prior approval of travel, and none of them have allowed reimbursement for dependancy. It comes down to a single fundamental rule: You absolutely, positively do NOT go ahead and do something first, and then get reimbursed for it later. That is one of the most fiscally irresponsible thing an organization can do, either for or not for profit. -Dan Rosenthal _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

I do not agree with this reasoning. If it were legally possible (and it is not) I would like to see the possibility for board members to get at least a small paycheck (10,000 euros per year or similar).

I think that board diversity is an important goal. And the practical reality is that serving on the board of the foundation takes up quite a bit of time and energy for all of us, and that is not likely to change.

Hello, Comparing cats and children is not really responsible.

I would venture to say that the time a board member spends worrying about how to support dependents is time not spend worrying about the Wikimedia Foundation.

Because Dependent care is not the responsibility of the foundation's expenses. There is a reason why other boards do not do this. If one is volunteering one's time as a board member, the volunteer is making a decision for themselves to give up that time. They must weigh that decision carefully against their own personal needs.

If I were a board member, for instance, it would be incredibly unreasonable for me to ask for reimbursement for boarding, care, and feeding of my cats while I was gone. It was my decision to get the cats, and the assumption of responsibility is my own. Similarly, the decision to be on the board would also be my own, and therefore the foundation would not be beholden to the care of my cats.

It's the same thing with dependents... if you cannot afford to keep care of them in the execution of ones duties, then do not sit on the board.

Ray Saintonge wrote: True, but this applies to people other than Wikimedia Foundation Officers. For example, several Wikipedians have incurred considerable personal expense traveling to archives, purchasing research materials and access, etc., in order to improve our articles, and AFAIK there's been no proposal to reimburse them. -Mark _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

GerardM wrote: That I disagree with strongly---The best-run nonprofits of which I'm aware, such as Software in the Public Interest, are run by volunteers as a hobby, not by career staff.

The Uninvited Co., Inc wrote: Why ? And, what does maturity have to do with that ?

Correct. We could add this.

Overkill as well imho. The policy already states "The lowest available airfares shall be sought when making bookings."

Sorry, what is "ticketing fees" ?

hmmm, right...