On 27 April 2014 22:29, Marc A. Pelletier <marc(a)uberbox.org> wrote:
On 04/27/2014 10:15 PM, Risker wrote:
WMF
staff review the applications using a specific rubric agreed upon with
the
FDC, and post their results.
So what then is the supposed conflict in letting WMDE also review the
proposed WMF spending using a rubric agreed upon with the FDC and
posting their results?
You certainly can't argue that WMDE is more in a position of conflict of
interest than WMF staff when evaluating proposed WMF spending?
The end result is the same: "The FDC reviews the analysis, asks
additional questions, notes the responses to questions directed at the
[applicant], and makes their decision".
Marc, in this case, they have no decision to make because there is no
funding request. Absent a funding request - the key criterion for
evaluation - they have no role in making a recommendation. Their opinion
is equivalent to yours, or mine, or any other person's on this mailing list.
Risker/Anne