Agree that "raise the maximum" is a serious concern. Perception of greed and money focus is one. The other problem is it mandates a specific priority on the organizers of "all" fundraising events which may be incompatible with the best interests of the project. For example I could "maximize" fundraising by paying less attention to other points, but those other points may be important and need balance too.

My redraft:

"Funds are needed for current and planned operations, contingencies and opportunities, and as a buffer for future. Fundraisers should aim to organize fundraising with a view to efficiently obtaining sufficient funds for these possible future needs, and should do so in a manner compatible with and balanced against the goals of our movement."

FT2

On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Joan Goma jrgoma@gmail.com wrote:

...

From: Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com

...

Why does the Board of Trustees think that WMF should raise the ?maximum possible amount of money?? Why not ask for what is needed and nothing more?

I agree. A no profit association should raise the "opportune" amount otherwise there a "profit".

Ilario

Non profit means that the raised money will go to develop the mission of

the organization not to the pockets of its owners.

From a mathematical point of view you can maximize the funds raised while keeping constant the disruption or you can minimize the disruption for a given amount of funds to be raised. But you cannot do both simultaneously.

But this is not a mathematical statement I think it transmits well the idea of balancing both effects keeping in mind that the disruption caused is of high importance and that the money raised is needed because we have many ideas and opportunities to do things that need not only volunteer effort but also some money. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l