[Foundation-l] PediaPress

[Andrew Garrett]

On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 5:55 PM, MZMcBride <z at mzmcbride.com> wrote:
> The problem I have with statements like these is that they feel
> disingenuous. The mission statement is as vague or as specific as the person
> arguing deems it to be. There are thousands of potential projects that
> Wikimedia could engage in that would fit perfectly within the current
> mission statement[1] and thousands more that would loosely fit in.
>
> It's mostly a matter of how many steps removed you choose to allow a
> particular venture to be. If I sell Wikimedia T-shirts, I'm building the
> Wikimedia brand, which leads to more donations during the fundraiser, which
> leads to more servers, which further enables the dissemination of
> educational content. Does that mean that selling T-shirts is within
> Wikimedia's mission?
>
> What is and isn't "mission-relevant" seems to be (perhaps intentionally)
> completely ambiguous. Ultimately, who decides whether a partnership with a
> company like PediaPress is mission-relevant? The Board of Trustees? The
> Executive Director? The Head of Business Development? And beyond who makes
> the decision, is there any guarantee that it will be a valid one? Given the
> vagueness of the mission statement, how much of a stretch is acceptable?

Shockingly, making decisions like this does not necessarily involve
reasoning, but judgement. Yes, the answers are not simple and logical
— because you have to weigh the costs against the benefits.

-- 
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/