[Foundation-l] Fundraising and site notice

[Anthony]

On 1/10/07, Jerome Banal <jerome.banal at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Take the "Monthly expense budget" and don't forget to add the "June '07"
> parts; that will give you the expected monthly expense budget for June,
> which should be the figure you quoted.

Did you try it?  Because I did several times, and I only just now
figured out what must be going on.

Monthly expense budget $75,500

Goals for bandwidth: ???  Right now the budget is $12,500.  There are
at least four different figures for the new "budget" (do you see why
this can't be called a budget?).  I see $50,000, $30,000, $62,000,
$100,000, and $74,000 (which you get when you calculate
$137,000-$75500+$12,500).  So let's go with $74,000, and pretend it
makes sense that bandwidth costs will go up sixfold?

Goals for hosting and operations: $38,000.  But then the calculation
that is made acts as though this is in addition to the current
$13,900.  So let's call it $52,000 total.  Hosting costs are expected
to nearly quadruple, I guess.

Goals for hiring: $100,000.  Let's assume this means $100,000 in
addition to the current goals.  Now we get the magic $275,000 number.

Am I getting this right?  Is this the actual budget for the next
fiscal year?  Is there a reason this can't just be put in a normal
form of a budget?

> The reserve is of course on budget we
> will need in the future, not on the current budget.
>
Presumably, though I would also think it would be the immediate
future, not 5 months in the future.  I also still don't see a budget
for FY '07-08.  I see a bunch of "goals".  So if the goal is to spend
$275,000/month, I guess the budget will be to spend even more, in case
the goal isn't reached.

> Budget is rising quickly because we have more and more people coming looking
> at WP, so we need bigger bandwidth, because we need more people to help on
> MediaWiki as it is becoming more complex and we see more and more useful
> features missing, etc.
>
Traffic is not going to quadruple (or increase 6-fold) in 5 months.
It's taken about a year for it to merely double.

> PS: By the way, it is indeed "at least". If it was not diffused before, it
> has been diffused at that date.

Except, I'm saying it wasn't diffused at that date.  In fact, $900,000
is between the low and the high reserve, so it isn't even diffused at
this date according to those numbers.

> So you might have heard about it before
> elsewhere, but in any case you have /at least/ been able to heard about it
> at that date (after that, you can have missed it, but that's another
> problem).
>
I haven't at least been able to heard about...huh?  What are we talking about?

Anthony