I was surprised to read the record https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_of_Endowment_fundin... of the decision to place $5M into the endowment. After the anouncement by Lisa Gruwell on this list https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-December/085712.html there was a discussion of what might be done with the funds raised, and a number of suggestions were made for how these funds could be used to directly support the work of the volunteers who contribute the content to the projects, such as https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-January/085835.html.
It is disappointing that the Board has chosen not to fund support of this kind. What is more than disappointing, but positively disturbing is that the decision was made in the light of an offer from a donor to match the sum put into the endowment. I suggest that this was not a fair offer, and the Board's decision was the wrong one. Effectively this donor has said to the Board that they will pay the Foundation not to support the volunteers, and the Board has agreed to follow their wishes. If the donor believes so strongly in the necessity to build up the mission by means of an Endowment, why did they not simply gift the money directly into the endowment without conditions? Equally, if the donor believes so strongly that money should not be spent supporting the volunteer community, then I challenge them to say so explicitly in public and to defend their position.
I call on the Board to explain to the community of volunteers precisely why they have chosen not to offer that support to the community and to state that they will not allow future decisions of this nature to be influenced by the wishes of one donor, however generous.
"Rogol"
Thanks for the link, Rogol. It is wonderful to hear that these generous donors have decided to match a deposit of $5 million into the endowment.
It is always a good thing if someone from the board could expand on what (if anything) the board is planning to do with the proposed expenses. The way you're framing this decision is not something I consider fair.
Best, Lodewijk
On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 4:33 AM, Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com wrote:
I was surprised to read the record https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_ of_Endowment_funding_(Fiscal_Year_2016-2017)_and_matching_$ 5_million_gift_from_Peter_Baldwin_and_Lisbet_Rausing of the decision to place $5M into the endowment. After the anouncement by Lisa Gruwell on this list https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016- December/085712.html there was a discussion of what might be done with the funds raised, and a number of suggestions were made for how these funds could be used to directly support the work of the volunteers who contribute the content to the projects, such as https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-January/085835.html .
It is disappointing that the Board has chosen not to fund support of this kind. What is more than disappointing, but positively disturbing is that the decision was made in the light of an offer from a donor to match the sum put into the endowment. I suggest that this was not a fair offer, and the Board's decision was the wrong one. Effectively this donor has said to the Board that they will pay the Foundation not to support the volunteers, and the Board has agreed to follow their wishes. If the donor believes so strongly in the necessity to build up the mission by means of an Endowment, why did they not simply gift the money directly into the endowment without conditions? Equally, if the donor believes so strongly that money should not be spent supporting the volunteer community, then I challenge them to say so explicitly in public and to defend their position.
I call on the Board to explain to the community of volunteers precisely why they have chosen not to offer that support to the community and to state that they will not allow future decisions of this nature to be influenced by the wishes of one donor, however generous.
"Rogol" _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Caveat: I support a definitely more frugal WMF so also the endowment.
Try to read it from a different perspective. Before donating *lots* of money donor wants to be sure WMF will be truly committed in pursuing the plan of an endowment. Putting the same amount of money is a prove, for donors, WMF truly wants to create an endowment.
Vito
2017-08-19 10:33 GMT+02:00 Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com:
I was surprised to read the record https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_ of_Endowment_funding_(Fiscal_Year_2016-2017)_and_matching_$ 5_million_gift_from_Peter_Baldwin_and_Lisbet_Rausing of the decision to place $5M into the endowment. After the anouncement by Lisa Gruwell on this list https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016- December/085712.html there was a discussion of what might be done with the funds raised, and a number of suggestions were made for how these funds could be used to directly support the work of the volunteers who contribute the content to the projects, such as https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-January/085835.html .
It is disappointing that the Board has chosen not to fund support of this kind. What is more than disappointing, but positively disturbing is that the decision was made in the light of an offer from a donor to match the sum put into the endowment. I suggest that this was not a fair offer, and the Board's decision was the wrong one. Effectively this donor has said to the Board that they will pay the Foundation not to support the volunteers, and the Board has agreed to follow their wishes. If the donor believes so strongly in the necessity to build up the mission by means of an Endowment, why did they not simply gift the money directly into the endowment without conditions? Equally, if the donor believes so strongly that money should not be spent supporting the volunteer community, then I challenge them to say so explicitly in public and to defend their position.
I call on the Board to explain to the community of volunteers precisely why they have chosen not to offer that support to the community and to state that they will not allow future decisions of this nature to be influenced by the wishes of one donor, however generous.
"Rogol" _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I am often critical of WMF, but I can only support this decision. The idea of creating of an environment was widely discussed in the community, including this mailing list, and had a widespread support. WMF merely follows the community wish in this case, and it is great to know that a donor agreed to match this amount.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Caveat: I support a definitely more frugal WMF so also the endowment.
Try to read it from a different perspective. Before donating *lots* of money donor wants to be sure WMF will be truly committed in pursuing the plan of an endowment. Putting the same amount of money is a prove, for donors, WMF truly wants to create an endowment.
Vito
2017-08-19 10:33 GMT+02:00 Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com:
I was surprised to read the record https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_ of_Endowment_funding_(Fiscal_Year_2016-2017)_and_matching_$ 5_million_gift_from_Peter_Baldwin_and_Lisbet_Rausing of the decision to place $5M into the endowment. After the anouncement
by
Lisa Gruwell on this list https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016- December/085712.html there was a discussion of what might be done with the funds raised, and a number of suggestions were made for how these funds could be used to directly support the work of the volunteers who contribute the content to the projects, such as https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-
January/085835.html
.
It is disappointing that the Board has chosen not to fund support of this kind. What is more than disappointing, but positively disturbing is that the decision was made in the light of an offer from a donor to match the sum put into the endowment. I suggest that this was not a fair offer,
and
the Board's decision was the wrong one. Effectively this donor has said
to
the Board that they will pay the Foundation not to support the
volunteers,
and the Board has agreed to follow their wishes. If the donor believes
so
strongly in the necessity to build up the mission by means of an
Endowment,
why did they not simply gift the money directly into the endowment
without
conditions? Equally, if the donor believes so strongly that money should not be spent supporting the volunteer community, then I challenge them to say so explicitly in public and to defend their position.
I call on the Board to explain to the community of volunteers precisely
why
they have chosen not to offer that support to the community and to state that they will not allow future decisions of this nature to be influenced by the wishes of one donor, however generous.
"Rogol" _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of endowment, The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort -- one of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the benefit of the projects today, and accumulating capital for the benefit of the projects tomorrow. I am asking the Board to say why they decided to strike that balance where they did -- given the obvious need for that support right now -- and whether it is appropriate for large donors to apparently influence that decision.
Reinhard
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
I am often critical of WMF, but I can only support this decision. The idea of creating of an environment was widely discussed in the community, including this mailing list, and had a widespread support. WMF merely follows the community wish in this case, and it is great to know that a donor agreed to match this amount.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Caveat: I support a definitely more frugal WMF so also the endowment.
Try to read it from a different perspective. Before donating *lots* of money donor wants to be sure WMF will be truly committed in pursuing the plan of an endowment. Putting the same amount of money is a prove, for donors, WMF truly wants to create an endowment.
Vito
2017-08-19 10:33 GMT+02:00 Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com:
I was surprised to read the record https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_ of_Endowment_funding_(Fiscal_Year_2016-2017)_and_matching_$ 5_million_gift_from_Peter_Baldwin_and_Lisbet_Rausing of the decision to place $5M into the endowment. After the anouncement
by
Lisa Gruwell on this list https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016- December/085712.html there was a discussion of what might be done with the funds raised,
and a
number of suggestions were made for how these funds could be used to directly support the work of the volunteers who contribute the content
to
the projects, such as https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-
January/085835.html
.
It is disappointing that the Board has chosen not to fund support of
this
kind. What is more than disappointing, but positively disturbing is
that
the decision was made in the light of an offer from a donor to match
the
sum put into the endowment. I suggest that this was not a fair offer,
and
the Board's decision was the wrong one. Effectively this donor has
said
to
the Board that they will pay the Foundation not to support the
volunteers,
and the Board has agreed to follow their wishes. If the donor believes
so
strongly in the necessity to build up the mission by means of an
Endowment,
why did they not simply gift the money directly into the endowment
without
conditions? Equally, if the donor believes so strongly that money
should
not be spent supporting the volunteer community, then I challenge them
to
say so explicitly in public and to defend their position.
I call on the Board to explain to the community of volunteers precisely
why
they have chosen not to offer that support to the community and to
state
that they will not allow future decisions of this nature to be
influenced
by the wishes of one donor, however generous.
"Rogol" _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
My personal position is it is critical to have a stable organization before growing. The WMF has achieved greater stability over the last 1.5 years so I think further growth is becoming again a good idea.
James
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com wrote:
I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of endowment, The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort -- one of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the benefit of the projects today, and accumulating capital for the benefit of the projects tomorrow. I am asking the Board to say why they decided to strike that balance where they did -- given the obvious need for that support right now -- and whether it is appropriate for large donors to apparently influence that decision.
Reinhard
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
I am often critical of WMF, but I can only support this decision. The
idea
of creating of an environment was widely discussed in the community, including this mailing list, and had a widespread support. WMF merely follows the community wish in this case, and it is great to know that a donor agreed to match this amount.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Caveat: I support a definitely more frugal WMF so also the endowment.
Try to read it from a different perspective. Before donating *lots* of money donor wants to be sure WMF will be truly committed in pursuing
the
plan of an endowment. Putting the same amount of money is a prove, for donors, WMF truly wants to create an endowment.
Vito
2017-08-19 10:33 GMT+02:00 Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com:
I was surprised to read the record https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_ of_Endowment_funding_(Fiscal_Year_2016-2017)_and_matching_$ 5_million_gift_from_Peter_Baldwin_and_Lisbet_Rausing of the decision to place $5M into the endowment. After the
anouncement
by
Lisa Gruwell on this list https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016- December/085712.html there was a discussion of what might be done with the funds raised,
and a
number of suggestions were made for how these funds could be used to directly support the work of the volunteers who contribute the
content
to
the projects, such as https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-
January/085835.html
.
It is disappointing that the Board has chosen not to fund support of
this
kind. What is more than disappointing, but positively disturbing is
that
the decision was made in the light of an offer from a donor to match
the
sum put into the endowment. I suggest that this was not a fair
offer,
and
the Board's decision was the wrong one. Effectively this donor has
said
to
the Board that they will pay the Foundation not to support the
volunteers,
and the Board has agreed to follow their wishes. If the donor
believes
so
strongly in the necessity to build up the mission by means of an
Endowment,
why did they not simply gift the money directly into the endowment
without
conditions? Equally, if the donor believes so strongly that money
should
not be spent supporting the volunteer community, then I challenge
them
to
say so explicitly in public and to defend their position.
I call on the Board to explain to the community of volunteers
precisely
why
they have chosen not to offer that support to the community and to
state
that they will not allow future decisions of this nature to be
influenced
by the wishes of one donor, however generous.
"Rogol" _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Both stability and growth come at a cost - is that cost acceptable? The way I understand it from the mid-year fundrasing report in January, the $5M were on top of the fundraising target, basically gathered by exposing our readers to more banners than needed. My opinion is that's a very high price to pay and that there should be more stringent rules regarding continuing fundraisers after their target has been reached (which in turn will probably require even better planning, including for the Endowment).
As to whether some donor influenced the Board's decision, that statement looks really far-fetched based on available information. It sounds more like an opportunity that either appeared or was created after the $5M target had been set.
Strainu
2017-08-21 23:49 GMT+03:00 James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com:
My personal position is it is critical to have a stable organization before growing. The WMF has achieved greater stability over the last 1.5 years so I think further growth is becoming again a good idea.
James
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com wrote:
I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of endowment, The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort -- one of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the benefit of the projects today, and accumulating capital for the benefit of the projects tomorrow. I am asking the Board to say why they decided to strike that balance where they did -- given the obvious need for that support right now -- and whether it is appropriate for large donors to apparently influence that decision.
Reinhard
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
I am often critical of WMF, but I can only support this decision. The
idea
of creating of an environment was widely discussed in the community, including this mailing list, and had a widespread support. WMF merely follows the community wish in this case, and it is great to know that a donor agreed to match this amount.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Caveat: I support a definitely more frugal WMF so also the endowment.
Try to read it from a different perspective. Before donating *lots* of money donor wants to be sure WMF will be truly committed in pursuing
the
plan of an endowment. Putting the same amount of money is a prove, for donors, WMF truly wants to create an endowment.
Vito
2017-08-19 10:33 GMT+02:00 Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com:
I was surprised to read the record https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_ of_Endowment_funding_(Fiscal_Year_2016-2017)_and_matching_$ 5_million_gift_from_Peter_Baldwin_and_Lisbet_Rausing of the decision to place $5M into the endowment. After the
anouncement
by
Lisa Gruwell on this list https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016- December/085712.html there was a discussion of what might be done with the funds raised,
and a
number of suggestions were made for how these funds could be used to directly support the work of the volunteers who contribute the
content
to
the projects, such as https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-
January/085835.html
.
It is disappointing that the Board has chosen not to fund support of
this
kind. What is more than disappointing, but positively disturbing is
that
the decision was made in the light of an offer from a donor to match
the
sum put into the endowment. I suggest that this was not a fair
offer,
and
the Board's decision was the wrong one. Effectively this donor has
said
to
the Board that they will pay the Foundation not to support the
volunteers,
and the Board has agreed to follow their wishes. If the donor
believes
so
strongly in the necessity to build up the mission by means of an
Endowment,
why did they not simply gift the money directly into the endowment
without
conditions? Equally, if the donor believes so strongly that money
should
not be spent supporting the volunteer community, then I challenge
them
to
say so explicitly in public and to defend their position.
I call on the Board to explain to the community of volunteers
precisely
why
they have chosen not to offer that support to the community and to
state
that they will not allow future decisions of this nature to be
influenced
by the wishes of one donor, however generous.
"Rogol" _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Personally I think the endowment is a great idea, stability and growth for our movement are paramount, IF, we use our money in the best way we can.
I also don't really care about how big the banner is: it's a minor inconvenience to click the "Hide" button (provided that we are able to hide automatically the button for those who actually donated: they deserve a bannerless page. I remember some complaints during the years about this).
What it's more important to me is where are we putting donors' money, both in terms of endowment and actual spending. The WMF is spending money to serve the movement, and how effective and efficient they are should be our only focus.
Regarding the endowment, the only little complaint I have is *where* we are investing those money. Reading the documentation page [1], I don't see mentioned anything regarding ethical or socially responsible investing (SRI).
There are many funds (of stocks or ETFs) that manage selected "ethical" financial products: these are also our values, and I think we should put donors' money where our mouth is. (I get that sometimes non-ethical investments yield more money, but at least we should have this discussion)
Aubrey
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Endowment
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
Both stability and growth come at a cost - is that cost acceptable? The way I understand it from the mid-year fundrasing report in January, the $5M were on top of the fundraising target, basically gathered by exposing our readers to more banners than needed. My opinion is that's a very high price to pay and that there should be more stringent rules regarding continuing fundraisers after their target has been reached (which in turn will probably require even better planning, including for the Endowment).
As to whether some donor influenced the Board's decision, that statement looks really far-fetched based on available information. It sounds more like an opportunity that either appeared or was created after the $5M target had been set.
Strainu
2017-08-21 23:49 GMT+03:00 James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com:
My personal position is it is critical to have a stable organization
before
growing. The WMF has achieved greater stability over the last 1.5 years
so
I think further growth is becoming again a good idea.
James
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
domedonfors@gmail.com>
wrote:
I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of endowment, The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort --
one
of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the
benefit
of the projects today, and accumulating capital for the benefit of the projects tomorrow. I am asking the Board to say why they decided to
strike
that balance where they did -- given the obvious need for that support right now -- and whether it is appropriate for large donors to
apparently
influence that decision.
Reinhard
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
I am often critical of WMF, but I can only support this decision. The
idea
of creating of an environment was widely discussed in the community, including this mailing list, and had a widespread support. WMF merely follows the community wish in this case, and it is great to know that
a
donor agreed to match this amount.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
Caveat: I support a definitely more frugal WMF so also the
endowment.
Try to read it from a different perspective. Before donating *lots*
of
money donor wants to be sure WMF will be truly committed in pursuing
the
plan of an endowment. Putting the same amount of money is a prove,
for
donors, WMF truly wants to create an endowment.
Vito
2017-08-19 10:33 GMT+02:00 Rogol Domedonfors <domedonfors@gmail.com
:
I was surprised to read the record https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_ of_Endowment_funding_(Fiscal_Year_2016-2017)_and_matching_$ 5_million_gift_from_Peter_Baldwin_and_Lisbet_Rausing of the decision to place $5M into the endowment. After the
anouncement
by
Lisa Gruwell on this list https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016- December/085712.html there was a discussion of what might be done with the funds
raised,
and a
number of suggestions were made for how these funds could be used
to
directly support the work of the volunteers who contribute the
content
to
the projects, such as https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-
January/085835.html
.
It is disappointing that the Board has chosen not to fund support
of
this
kind. What is more than disappointing, but positively disturbing
is
that
the decision was made in the light of an offer from a donor to
match
the
sum put into the endowment. I suggest that this was not a fair
offer,
and
the Board's decision was the wrong one. Effectively this donor
has
said
to
the Board that they will pay the Foundation not to support the
volunteers,
and the Board has agreed to follow their wishes. If the donor
believes
so
strongly in the necessity to build up the mission by means of an
Endowment,
why did they not simply gift the money directly into the endowment
without
conditions? Equally, if the donor believes so strongly that money
should
not be spent supporting the volunteer community, then I challenge
them
to
say so explicitly in public and to defend their position.
I call on the Board to explain to the community of volunteers
precisely
why
they have chosen not to offer that support to the community and to
state
that they will not allow future decisions of this nature to be
influenced
by the wishes of one donor, however generous.
"Rogol" _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be invested inline with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that promotes war or surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the case but would have to verify.
J
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Andrea Zanni zanni.andrea84@gmail.com wrote:
Personally I think the endowment is a great idea, stability and growth for our movement are paramount, IF, we use our money in the best way we can.
I also don't really care about how big the banner is: it's a minor inconvenience to click the "Hide" button (provided that we are able to hide automatically the button for those who actually donated: they deserve a bannerless page. I remember some complaints during the years about this).
What it's more important to me is where are we putting donors' money, both in terms of endowment and actual spending. The WMF is spending money to serve the movement, and how effective and efficient they are should be our only focus.
Regarding the endowment, the only little complaint I have is *where* we are investing those money. Reading the documentation page [1], I don't see mentioned anything regarding ethical or socially responsible investing (SRI).
There are many funds (of stocks or ETFs) that manage selected "ethical" financial products: these are also our values, and I think we should put donors' money where our mouth is. (I get that sometimes non-ethical investments yield more money, but at least we should have this discussion)
Aubrey
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Endowment
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
Both stability and growth come at a cost - is that cost acceptable? The way I understand it from the mid-year fundrasing report in January, the $5M were on top of the fundraising target, basically gathered by exposing our readers to more banners than needed. My opinion is that's a very high price to pay and that there should be more stringent rules regarding continuing fundraisers after their target has been reached (which in turn will probably require even better planning, including for the Endowment).
As to whether some donor influenced the Board's decision, that statement looks really far-fetched based on available information. It sounds more like an opportunity that either appeared or was created after the $5M target had been set.
Strainu
2017-08-21 23:49 GMT+03:00 James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com:
My personal position is it is critical to have a stable organization
before
growing. The WMF has achieved greater stability over the last 1.5 years
so
I think further growth is becoming again a good idea.
James
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
domedonfors@gmail.com>
wrote:
I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of endowment, The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort --
one
of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the
benefit
of the projects today, and accumulating capital for the benefit of the projects tomorrow. I am asking the Board to say why they decided to
strike
that balance where they did -- given the obvious need for that support right now -- and whether it is appropriate for large donors to
apparently
influence that decision.
Reinhard
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
I am often critical of WMF, but I can only support this decision.
The
idea
of creating of an environment was widely discussed in the community, including this mailing list, and had a widespread support. WMF
merely
follows the community wish in this case, and it is great to know
that
a
donor agreed to match this amount.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
Caveat: I support a definitely more frugal WMF so also the
endowment.
Try to read it from a different perspective. Before donating
*lots*
of
money donor wants to be sure WMF will be truly committed in
pursuing
the
plan of an endowment. Putting the same amount of money is a prove,
for
donors, WMF truly wants to create an endowment.
Vito
2017-08-19 10:33 GMT+02:00 Rogol Domedonfors <
domedonfors@gmail.com
:
> I was surprised to read the record > https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_ > of_Endowment_funding_(Fiscal_Year_2016-2017)_and_matching_$ > 5_million_gift_from_Peter_Baldwin_and_Lisbet_Rausing > of the decision to place $5M into the endowment. After the
anouncement
by > Lisa Gruwell on this list > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016- > December/085712.html > there was a discussion of what might be done with the funds
raised,
and a
> number of suggestions were made for how these funds could be
used
to
> directly support the work of the volunteers who contribute the
content
to
> the projects, such as > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017- January/085835.html > . > > It is disappointing that the Board has chosen not to fund
support
of
this
> kind. What is more than disappointing, but positively
disturbing
is
that
> the decision was made in the light of an offer from a donor to
match
the
> sum put into the endowment. I suggest that this was not a fair
offer,
and > the Board's decision was the wrong one. Effectively this donor
has
said
to > the Board that they will pay the Foundation not to support the volunteers, > and the Board has agreed to follow their wishes. If the donor
believes
so > strongly in the necessity to build up the mission by means of an Endowment, > why did they not simply gift the money directly into the
endowment
without > conditions? Equally, if the donor believes so strongly that
money
should
> not be spent supporting the volunteer community, then I
challenge
them
to
> say so explicitly in public and to defend their position. > > I call on the Board to explain to the community of volunteers
precisely
why > they have chosen not to offer that support to the community and
to
state
> that they will not allow future decisions of this nature to be
influenced
> by the wishes of one donor, however generous. > > "Rogol" > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote:
Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be invested inline with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that promotes war or surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the case but would have to verify.
I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea.
C
I have been send further details. As expected Tides (who runs our endowment) has a strong philosophy around social justice.
James
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Cristian Consonni cristian@balist.es wrote:
On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote:
Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be invested inline with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that promotes war or surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the case but would have to verify.
I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea.
C
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Just jumping in with a few points of information regarding the Endowment:
1) I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment. As James indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and this is one of the areas of expertise. We have been looking at environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform against the benchmarks financially. We are going to be publishing more information about this soon.
2) Regarding the matching grant, this funder has made large grants to the Wikimedia Foundation for general support for our annual work for almost a decade. They have also now provided major support to the endowment. They have provided generous support for our present work and our future work. It is positive thing that this grant was positioned as a matching grant. It doubles the impact of a portion of the contributions that our online donors made this year. It is a great story that we are sharing with other potential endowment donors. We are hoping to find another major donor (or donors) that will match the $5 million for the endowment that is in the FY 2017-18 annual plan as well.
Best, Lisa
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:15 AM, James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com wrote:
I have been send further details. As expected Tides (who runs our endowment) has a strong philosophy around social justice.
James
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Cristian Consonni cristian@balist.es wrote:
On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote:
Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be invested
inline
with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that promotes war
or
surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the case but would have to verify.
I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea.
C
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Lisa
Thanks for that explanation. If it had already been decided to contribute the $5M to the Endowment before the offer of matching funds, then there would be no appearance of the offer influencing the Board's decision. Can you confirm that was the case? But the main point of my question to the Board is to ask why they decided that placing this large sum into the Endowment was more important than using it to support the work of the volunteer community (whether or not the offer of matching funds was part of that decision) directly. Can you throw any light on their reasons?
Rudyard
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Lisa Gruwell lgruwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
Just jumping in with a few points of information regarding the Endowment:
- I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment. As James
indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and this is one of the areas of expertise. We have been looking at environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform against the benchmarks financially. We are going to be publishing more information about this soon.
- Regarding the matching grant, this funder has made large grants to the
Wikimedia Foundation for general support for our annual work for almost a decade. They have also now provided major support to the endowment. They have provided generous support for our present work and our future work. It is positive thing that this grant was positioned as a matching grant. It doubles the impact of a portion of the contributions that our online donors made this year. It is a great story that we are sharing with other potential endowment donors. We are hoping to find another major donor (or donors) that will match the $5 million for the endowment that is in the FY 2017-18 annual plan as well.
Best, Lisa
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:15 AM, James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com wrote:
I have been send further details. As expected Tides (who runs our endowment) has a strong philosophy around social justice.
James
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Cristian Consonni cristian@balist.es wrote:
On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote:
Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be invested
inline
with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that promotes war
or
surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the case
but
would have to verify.
I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea.
C
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Sorry, I wasn't at the meeting, so I can't speak to that.
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com wrote:
Lisa
Thanks for that explanation. If it had already been decided to contribute the $5M to the Endowment before the offer of matching funds, then there would be no appearance of the offer influencing the Board's decision. Can you confirm that was the case? But the main point of my question to the Board is to ask why they decided that placing this large sum into the Endowment was more important than using it to support the work of the volunteer community (whether or not the offer of matching funds was part of that decision) directly. Can you throw any light on their reasons?
Rudyard
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Lisa Gruwell lgruwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
Just jumping in with a few points of information regarding the Endowment:
- I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment. As
James
indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and
this
is one of the areas of expertise. We have been looking at environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform against the benchmarks financially. We are going to be publishing more
information
about this soon.
- Regarding the matching grant, this funder has made large grants to the
Wikimedia Foundation for general support for our annual work for almost a decade. They have also now provided major support to the endowment.
They
have provided generous support for our present work and our future work. It is positive thing that this grant was positioned as a matching grant. It doubles the impact of a portion of the contributions that our online donors made this year. It is a great story that we are sharing with
other
potential endowment donors. We are hoping to find another major donor
(or
donors) that will match the $5 million for the endowment that is in the
FY
2017-18 annual plan as well.
Best, Lisa
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:15 AM, James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com wrote:
I have been send further details. As expected Tides (who runs our endowment) has a strong philosophy around social justice.
James
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Cristian Consonni <
cristian@balist.es>
wrote:
On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote:
Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be invested
inline
with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that promotes
war
or
surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the case
but
would have to verify.
I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea.
C
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Lisa
Thanks anyway. Perhaps one of the members of the Board will comment, in the interests of transparency.
Ronald
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Lisa Gruwell lgruwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't at the meeting, so I can't speak to that.
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonfors@gmail.com
wrote:
Lisa
Thanks for that explanation. If it had already been decided to
contribute
the $5M to the Endowment before the offer of matching funds, then there would be no appearance of the offer influencing the Board's decision.
Can
you confirm that was the case? But the main point of my question to the Board is to ask why they decided that placing this large sum into the Endowment was more important than using it to support the work of the volunteer community (whether or not the offer of matching funds was part
of
that decision) directly. Can you throw any light on their reasons?
Rudyard
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Lisa Gruwell lgruwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
Just jumping in with a few points of information regarding the
Endowment:
- I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment. As
James
indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and
this
is one of the areas of expertise. We have been looking at
environmental,
social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform
against
the benchmarks financially. We are going to be publishing more
information
about this soon.
- Regarding the matching grant, this funder has made large grants to
the
Wikimedia Foundation for general support for our annual work for
almost a
decade. They have also now provided major support to the endowment.
They
have provided generous support for our present work and our future
work.
It is positive thing that this grant was positioned as a matching
grant.
It doubles the impact of a portion of the contributions that our online donors made this year. It is a great story that we are sharing with
other
potential endowment donors. We are hoping to find another major donor
(or
donors) that will match the $5 million for the endowment that is in the
FY
2017-18 annual plan as well.
Best, Lisa
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:15 AM, James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com
wrote:
I have been send further details. As expected Tides (who runs our endowment) has a strong philosophy around social justice.
James
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Cristian Consonni <
cristian@balist.es>
wrote:
On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote:
Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be invested
inline
with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that promotes
war
or
surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the
case
but
would have to verify.
I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea.
C
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Rogol I don't understanding how you have interpreted this as a choice between community and stability.
Could you explain?
Seddon
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com wrote:
Lisa
Thanks anyway. Perhaps one of the members of the Board will comment, in the interests of transparency.
Ronald
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Lisa Gruwell lgruwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't at the meeting, so I can't speak to that.
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
domedonfors@gmail.com
wrote:
Lisa
Thanks for that explanation. If it had already been decided to
contribute
the $5M to the Endowment before the offer of matching funds, then there would be no appearance of the offer influencing the Board's decision.
Can
you confirm that was the case? But the main point of my question to
the
Board is to ask why they decided that placing this large sum into the Endowment was more important than using it to support the work of the volunteer community (whether or not the offer of matching funds was
part
of
that decision) directly. Can you throw any light on their reasons?
Rudyard
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Lisa Gruwell lgruwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
Just jumping in with a few points of information regarding the
Endowment:
- I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment. As
James
indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and
this
is one of the areas of expertise. We have been looking at
environmental,
social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform
against
the benchmarks financially. We are going to be publishing more
information
about this soon.
- Regarding the matching grant, this funder has made large grants to
the
Wikimedia Foundation for general support for our annual work for
almost a
decade. They have also now provided major support to the endowment.
They
have provided generous support for our present work and our future
work.
It is positive thing that this grant was positioned as a matching
grant.
It doubles the impact of a portion of the contributions that our
online
donors made this year. It is a great story that we are sharing with
other
potential endowment donors. We are hoping to find another major
donor
(or
donors) that will match the $5 million for the endowment that is in
the
FY
2017-18 annual plan as well.
Best, Lisa
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:15 AM, James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com
wrote:
I have been send further details. As expected Tides (who runs our endowment) has a strong philosophy around social justice.
James
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Cristian Consonni <
cristian@balist.es>
wrote:
On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote: > Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be
invested
inline
> with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that
promotes
war
or
> surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the
case
but
> would have to verify.
I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea.
C
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
James
Certainly. When the probability of last year's fundraising effort generating more income than had been expected emerged, there was a discussion here about how that "surplus" might be used. There were some suggestions for using it to directly assist the members of the volunteer community in their work of contributing content -- such as funding books, on- and off-line library subscriptions, for the content contributors -- or improving the contributing environment -- such as hiring more devs for community tech projects -- or building the community -- such as extra funding for community events. That money, once gone, would be gone forever, and there is the risk that further donations would not be forthcoming at the same rate. The alternative, which was adopted, was to give it to the Endowment to generate a permanent income which might be used to fund such acitivities in the future. That money once in the Endowment is, presumably, always in the Endowment, and the income can be relied on to a reasonable extent.
The Board has chosen to favour long-term stability over short-term content contribution. That is clearly their prerogative, but it is a choice, and a choice that affects the community her and now. It seems reasonable to ask the Board to explain to the community, who provide the content, and whose work sustains the entire mission, and which ultimately motivates people to make such generous donations, why, given that opportunity, they did not see it as so important to give them more in the way of direct help in contributing that content and building that community.
Rod
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:31 PM, Joseph Seddon jseddon@wikimedia.org wrote:
Rogol I don't understanding how you have interpreted this as a choice between community and stability.
Could you explain?
Seddon
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com wrote:
Lisa
Thanks anyway. Perhaps one of the members of the Board will comment, in the interests of transparency.
Ronald
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Lisa Gruwell lgruwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't at the meeting, so I can't speak to that.
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
domedonfors@gmail.com
wrote:
Lisa
Thanks for that explanation. If it had already been decided to
contribute
the $5M to the Endowment before the offer of matching funds, then
there
would be no appearance of the offer influencing the Board's decision.
Can
you confirm that was the case? But the main point of my question to
the
Board is to ask why they decided that placing this large sum into the Endowment was more important than using it to support the work of the volunteer community (whether or not the offer of matching funds was
part
of
that decision) directly. Can you throw any light on their reasons?
Rudyard
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Lisa Gruwell <
lgruwell@wikimedia.org>
wrote:
Just jumping in with a few points of information regarding the
Endowment:
- I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment.
As
James
indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation
and
this
is one of the areas of expertise. We have been looking at
environmental,
social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform
against
the benchmarks financially. We are going to be publishing more
information
about this soon.
- Regarding the matching grant, this funder has made large grants
to
the
Wikimedia Foundation for general support for our annual work for
almost a
decade. They have also now provided major support to the
endowment.
They
have provided generous support for our present work and our future
work.
It is positive thing that this grant was positioned as a matching
grant.
It doubles the impact of a portion of the contributions that our
online
donors made this year. It is a great story that we are sharing
with
other
potential endowment donors. We are hoping to find another major
donor
(or
donors) that will match the $5 million for the endowment that is in
the
FY
2017-18 annual plan as well.
Best, Lisa
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:15 AM, James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com
wrote:
I have been send further details. As expected Tides (who runs our endowment) has a strong philosophy around social justice.
James
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Cristian Consonni <
cristian@balist.es>
wrote:
> On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote: > > Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be
invested
inline > > with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that
promotes
war
or > > surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the
case
but
> > would have to verify. > > I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea. > > C > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- Seddon
*Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)* *Wikimedia Foundation* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Lisa Gruwell lgruwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
Just jumping in with a few points of information regarding the Endowment:
- I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment. As James
indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and this is one of the areas of expertise. We have been looking at environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform against the benchmarks financially. We are going to be publishing more information about this soon.
Thank you Lisa, I stand corrected.
Aubrey
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Lisa Gruwell lgruwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
... regarding the Endowment:
- I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment. As James
indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and this is one of the areas of expertise. We have been looking at environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform against the benchmarks financially. We are going to be publishing more information about this soon.
I am very much looking forward to that. I hope the recommendations will be congruent with https://imgur.com/a/Op5UT
When I look at https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/08/what-you-need-to-know-about-ethical-i... I am not always inspired that the managers' goals are to maximize years of productive life.
On 8/21/17 6:48 PM, Rogol Domedonfors wrote:
I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of endowment, The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort -- one of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the benefit of the projects today, and accumulating capital for the benefit of the projects tomorrow. I am asking the Board to say why they decided to strike that balance where they did -- given the obvious need for that support right now -- and whether it is appropriate for large donors to apparently influence that decision.
I can't speak for anyone other than myself.
Given the level of reserves that the WMF has today, your entire approach here (the assumption that $5 million going into the endowment therefore reduces spending) is invalid. There is enough money to do both.
The question is therefore not "Why did you save the money for the future rather than spend it today?"
The question is: why don't we increase spending today?
We have always followed, and should continue to follow, a thoughtful process of strategic planning and budgeting. A windfall of cash from a successful fundraising should never give rise to immediate and poorly planned spending.
If you believe, as I do, that we have a great opportunity to responsibly spend more money at the Foundation on suporting the projects in the next few years - then please support the strategic planning process - that's the right forum to have a voice in what happens next.
Random demands for explanations on the mailing list - particulary when so fundamentally mistaken in basic assumptions - aren't really helpful.
--Jimbo
Jimbo
I understand you to say that the WMF could have afforded to spend $5M on direct support of volunteer contributors had it chosen to, without prejudice to the decision to place $5M into the Endowment. I seem to recall that you stated on Wikipedia that "I support expansion of the scholarship program (and thus spending more money on Wikimania overall)" Given that you believe that the money was in fact available for such a purpose, it seems that we are united in our regret that it was not spent for that purpose -- a full fee scholarship for all attendees would have consumed something like 5% of the sum which you say could have been made available,
Perhaps you could persuade the Board of Trustees to consider your proposal in time for the Wikimania 2018 in Cape Town to use in their financial planning. It would also be splendid if the Board were to consider other ways of supporting volunteer content contributors, such as purchasing books, journal and library subscriptions and so forth.
Redmond
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Jimmy Wales jimmywales@wikia-inc.com wrote:
On 8/21/17 6:48 PM, Rogol Domedonfors wrote:
I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of endowment, The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort --
one
of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the
benefit
of the projects today, and accumulating capital for the benefit of the projects tomorrow. I am asking the Board to say why they decided to
strike
that balance where they did -- given the obvious need for that support right now -- and whether it is appropriate for large donors to apparently influence that decision.
I can't speak for anyone other than myself.
Given the level of reserves that the WMF has today, your entire approach here (the assumption that $5 million going into the endowment therefore reduces spending) is invalid. There is enough money to do both.
The question is therefore not "Why did you save the money for the future rather than spend it today?"
The question is: why don't we increase spending today?
We have always followed, and should continue to follow, a thoughtful process of strategic planning and budgeting. A windfall of cash from a successful fundraising should never give rise to immediate and poorly planned spending.
If you believe, as I do, that we have a great opportunity to responsibly spend more money at the Foundation on suporting the projects in the next few years - then please support the strategic planning process - that's the right forum to have a voice in what happens next.
Random demands for explanations on the mailing list - particulary when so fundamentally mistaken in basic assumptions - aren't really helpful.
--Jimbo
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org