[Foundation-l] Mission & Vision statement updated

[Ray Saintonge]

Thomas Dalton wrote:

>>There is actually, at least under U.S. law, a definition of "public
>>charity", which is the category the Wikimedia Foundation falls under,
>>and such charities must dedicate themselves to "public purposes", which
>>have some more detailed definitions but would almost certainly not
>>include a "caviar for aristocrats" purpose.  So of course the Foundation
>>could not change its purpose from that of a public charity to something
>>not a public charity without compromising its current status.  But the
>>question is whether *any* change needs to be vetted in advance by the
>>IRS to verify that this hasn't happened, which is a separate matter.
>>    
>>
>That's as may be (I don't believe that's the case under UK law, which
>is what I was going by, but US law could well be different), but it
>doesn't really make any difference. If I donate money to a charity,
>they cannot use that money to do something I haven't given permission
>for, however charitable it may be. If I donate to a charity to provide
>fun activities for children aged 7-10 and they let 11 year olds in, I
>can sue.
>
At that rate you should soon be insisting that the kids that go trick or 
treating on your neighborhood on Hallowe'en be carrying secure 
identification to make sure they are not over age. :-)

Ec