[Wikimedia-l] letter from the FDC to the WMF

[Craig Franklin]

Well, this change won't make things perfect - there is still something of a
conflict of interest there and obviously the WMF board can choose to ignore
the FDC's recommendation altogether and award itself an unreasonably
generous budget.  However, from last year's experience, where the WMF plan
was apparently discussed in depth and opposed by at least one FDC member,
I'd say that it doesn't look at all like it's a rubber stamp so far.

We should encourage each step forward rather than moan that there are many
steps yet to take.  "Perfection is the enemy of the good.", and all that.

Cheers,
Craig Franklin


On 22 October 2013 22:52, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Craig Franklin
> <cfranklin at halonetwork.net> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been aware of this brewing, but can only say that I'm pleased to
> > finally reach the surface.  There is no good reason for part of the WMF's
> > budget to be privileged or quarantined from the same scrutiny that the
> rest
> > of movement spending is subjected to.  I therefore urge Sue and the WMF
> to
> > accept the FDC's proposal in full.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Craig Franklin
> > (personal view only)
> >
> >
>
> Except that from both a practical and legal perspective the authority
> of the FDC comes from the WMF; this is the fundamental problem with
> having it purport to "review" the Foundation's spending and activity.
> If the Foundation's Board disagrees with the FDC decision on funding
> the WMF, it has not just the option but the legal duty to overrule it.
> The most likely outcome, then, is that the FDC functions as a rubber
> stamp for the WMF - perhaps with cosmetic adjustments or changes for
> appearances sake.
>