There is no intention to hide the costs to the chapter of the Chapter's involvement in the Wikiconference Berlin, but it is not a simple calculation.
One person was asking for trustee expenses, others are asking how much we (WMUK) spent on the entire conference (including staff, volunteers, speakers, trustees etc). I hope to clarify this here.
So for trustee expenses: not all of the board went as trustees, as two (at least) were invited as speakers - reporting that as a trustee cost wouldn't be accurate. As to staff – I attended as the Chief Executive, but the other two staff were also invited speakers. One of the staff had some costs paid by the Foundation.
As to the cost mine was probably on the low end, as I booked my flight early and always use public transport or bicycles, but from recollection (and I have to sign off all trustee expenses) the total cost to the chapter is close to £2600. My expenses are here https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Expenses_2014-2015 and give a good baseline.
The trustees are discussing how best to itemise expenses in a way that ensures an appropriate level of transparency at the board meeting this Saturday.
I do not know why anyone would call the conference a 'junket', that needs a citation I'd think, but it was, as I have explained before in detail, a productive working three days at a reasonable cost to the chapter. If you think it was a junket then the whole conference could be judged a waste of money and the previous ones as well - and they aren't. The reality is that these are important working conferences where chapters and other organisations meet to discuss best practice. Jon Davies.
On 1 June 2014 12:22, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 4:36 AM, Russavia russavia.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
I have read the links that you have provided and I find it totally unacceptable that an organisation can not provide costs for sending 8 people on a junket to New York.
When I have operated businesses in the real world, I have been able to
pull
up any financial information (expenses, revenue, etc) within a matter of seconds and with a click of a mouse. It is astounding that WMUK is not
able
to do the same thing.
That Richard Symonds is saying that it is not a good use of resources,
and
basically putting it in the too hard basket, to supply the amount of
donor
dollars which have been spent on this controversial junket is, to use a great British colloquialism, total bollocks.
WMUK is an organisation which blows its own trumpet on how transparent it has become in the last 2 years, so it seriously should not be too
difficult
to do this in a timely fashion.
Cheers
Russavia
The conference was in Berlin, not New York.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2014
~Nathan _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe