[Foundation-l] Grants -- a proposal

[Ray Saintonge]

Daniel Mayer wrote:

>--- daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:
>  
>
>>I therefore suggest that donors have the possibility of earmarking their  
>>donation. That is to say, they will have the ability to specify where they
>>want their money to go. In that case, one donor may give specifically for
>>servers, while another donor may give specifically to promote a language,
>>print a  particular wikibook, or whatever.  
>>    
>>
>Hm. This type of thing locks up funds and makes running organizations much more
>difficult than necessary, IMO. The board in consultation with its various
>officers are the body by which budgeting is done. Feedback from donors can and
>should be collected in a systematic and easy to parse way, but should not tie
>the hands of the board (grants excepted). That type of information should
>*inform* the board's decision - not dictate it. 
>
>Most of the annual California state budget, for example, has been dictated by
>various voter initiatives. Thus lawmakers have very little to work with while
>crafting budgets. This is one reason often cited for California's on-going
>financial crisis. 
>
>So while this at first sounds like a neat idea, in practice it just makes our
>budgeting less flexible and thus less able to adapt to changing conditions,
>IMO. 
>  
>
I very much agree that targetted funding brings its own set of 
problems.  Funding with strings attached could threaten the independence 
of the wiki if those funds become too important.  This doesn't mean that 
all special funding should be avoided.  Microfunding articles in certain 
languages could probably be handled by national chapters.  But when you 
can pay $1.00 for a reasonably good article, having $1,000.00 in the 
bank may bew too much.

Ec