[Foundation-l] Accepting airline miles as donations

[Dan Rosenthal]

On Mar 5, 2008, at 12:48 AM, Brianna Laugher wrote:

> On 05/03/2008, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Some would contest whether that's a smart idea.
>
> Some being who, Dan - you? If you then why not just say that.

I'm far from the only one that thinks that it's a bad idea. Hence why  
I worded it the way I did.
>
>
> Do we want WMF to be the "Red Cross for information"? Or just the
> glorified web-host? It seems to me the community has implicitly
> accepted the Red Cross route, because the Foundation has massively
> expanded and professionalised (not to mention moved across the
> country) without uproarious complaint. The glorified web-host wouldn't
> need to do these things.

Shouldn't the WMF figure out what it is supposed to be, rather than  
us? If the foundation is going to be some sort of "red cross for  
information" then it should be making the same advocacy efforts that  
the Red Cross does, like making reports on the freedom of information  
in countries (similar to the red crosses reports on health standards),  
criticize countries that censor information (the same way the red  
cross criticizes that violate human rights of their citizens) and such.

>
>
> To say of Wikimedia "this is an internet site" is a big disservice to
> volunteers. "An internet site" is only the beginning of what it is.
>

It's the single largest part of what it is, dwarfing the non-internet  
aspects of the site. How many hits a day do the combined Wikipedias  
get? Compare that to the reach of the print and offline versions.  
Fundamentally, it is a wiki, and that means internet.

> If you disagree that there are huge benefits from face-to-face
> meetings, that have no virtual substite, then I suppose nothing would
> convince you on that point.... but it is utterly remarkable and
> worthwhile and necessary. Not every month. But from time to time.
>

Nobody is saying there are no benefits to face-to-face meetings, nor  
that they should never happen.


> I am grateful and pleased that the Foundation takes its commitment to
> being a worldwide organisation seriously. It really shows respect for
> the community. That's necessarily going to mean more travel than other
> not for profits that don't have such a global angle.


To be clear, the foundation (that is not in the most secure of  
financial positions) giving grants for people to attend a conference  
is respect for the community/commitment to being a worldwide  
organization? I'd think things like having projects in every possible  
language, greater translational support etc, are better metrics of a  
commitment to being a worldwide organization. The Wikipedia Academies  
in Africa are a commitment to being a worldwide organization. I fail  
to see how paying for people to go to Wikimania is the same thing.

>
>
> And while the Foundation has a big travel budget, it's still a small
> fraction of the total budget, which is dominated by Acceptable Tech
> Stuff.

That "tech stuff" still dominates travel, should be a sign that the  
foundation is still primarily internet based organization.

>
>
> Brianna
>
> -- 
> They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment:
> http://modernthings.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l