[Foundation-l] Instant Commons : INCORRECT

[Anthere]

Erik Moeller wrote:

> InstantCommons (see [[m:InstantCommons]]) is a perfect example of
> that. We met with Kennisnet in February, and they basically said "Wow,
> good idea, let's do it! But, we would like the WMF to authorize it."
> Since then, the project has been in organizational limbo, moving
> slowly as molasses through several layers of bureaucracy, from SP to
> Legal to SP to Board and back again, with complex contracts being
> drawn up when all that needed to be done was giving them a call and
> letting Gerard manage the project. This is about building a
> relationship with a developer in Ghana, who could have started work on
> this project as early as March. Now it's June and we still can't go
> ahead. We're talking about a EUR 5000-10000 project. How on Earth do
> you intend to manage large grants with that kind of attitude towards
> project realization?


Ah NO. No and No.

The WMF has authorized it. See 
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special_projects_committee/Resolutions#2006-23A

The authorization is from at least a month ago. And you know that Erik.

The problem now is to get the grant from Kennisnet. They have not yet 
agreed to provide this sum for the development of the project. You 
should not blame WMF for not convincing Kennisnet to support your 
project. This is very largely incorrect.


Anthere