Jimmy Wales wrote in part:
For me, the key to the wikipedia volunteer experience
is just that --
it's all volunteer. Everything that we have accomplished together we
have accomplished voluntarily, no one has been forced in any way to
help us. Government funding is pernicious to volunteer efforts
primarily because it means that some people -- the taxpayers footing
the bill -- are being forced to do so.
And corporate funding is also pernicious in its own way,
since the labour force that makes money for the corporation
typically has no say in how that money is spent in philanthropy.
There is less forcing here -- people are forced to get a job,
but they have some choice in which job to get -- than with the state,
but at the same time, the state gives its victims (citizens) more say
in how the coerced money is used -- at least in the US and France.
Yes, these are political opinions. Since our political opinions are diverse,
it might help to declare that:
1) You (Jimmy) prefer corporate donations to government;
2) Some other Wikimedians prefer government donations to corporate;
3) Wikimedia intends to go with voluntary personal donations entirely,
and to rely on the efforts of volunteers more than their money.
I think that you already have these plans,
but it people may confuse your personal opinions (#1)
with your plans for the Foundation in general (#3).