I can very well understand why people are careful about commenting. Most people who have the insight to make sensible comments on the con located matter have a stake in it. They are active in the wmf, want to run for a committee in which process they might be deemed too opinionated or they fear that it might harm the future applications of their chapter or project. I'm afraid that to a very large extent there are too many interdependencies for a proper public discussion on many issues.
That said, while I disagree with several things in the advice, such as the somewhat childish and symbolic cut of 2000 USD against wmar, overall I also see various improvements in the level of detail and arguments that ought to be applauded.
Lodewijk On Nov 23, 2014 9:35 AM, "Thomas Goldammer" thogol@gmail.com wrote:
Gerard,
this is called "narrowing focus" by WMF, you see.
But you wanted a comment on the FDC. The only thing I can say is: To base such a decision on things like "the FDC feels" and "to appear" and "it is likely" (all quotes from their text within a single paragraph) makes me think that they get very poor information and instead of trying to get it richer (for example by talking to *all* relevant people), they make a very poor decision out of it.
Th.
2014-11-23 8:27 GMT+01:00 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com:
Hoi, I am really surprised how little attention this is getting.
I have a few questions, observations. When I read the arguments for
cutting
the request of the German chapter, I get the impression that the Germans are punished. I also find no considerations to the consequences of NOT providing the requested funding. There are many people employed by the German chapter, are they to be dismissed or is there to be less money for activities? When I read about the Dutch request, they are praised for
being
prudent and careful planners but they are punished for not being actively involved in fundraising.
The WIkimedia Foundation deliberately excluded the chapters from the fundraising efforts. Enough comments have been made about this recently;
it
is obvious to many that the WMF seems not to care too much about what
funds
are raised outside the USA. There is also no relation between fundraising in a country and activities in a country. I am annoyed that the WMF is so two faced in this.
The process of handing out gifts makes beggars of the chapters. They have to comply with the vagaries of what committee members think at a given time. The process of handing out is very much solidified in time and from the impression I get this is true for the chapters but not for the WMF itself. When it finds a need to do whatever, it can. When a chapter
finds
the same need it cannot.
In my opinion by making chapters second class citizens, the WMF will
remain
USA and English centred. That does not help our goal of "sharing in the
sum
of all available knowledge". Thanks, GerardM
PS there are more chapters where I am not happy about the granting of
gifts
either.
On 21 November 2014 at 17:34, Dariusz Jemielniak darekj@alk.edu.pl wrote:
Greetings, friends,
As you all know, the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) meets twice a
year
to help make decisions about how to effectively allocate movement funds
to
achieve the Wikimedia movement's mission, vision, and strategy. [1] We recently met in San Francisco to deliberate on the 11 annual plan grant proposals submitted for this round of review. [2] We thank these organizations for their hard work on their annual plans and proposals.
The FDC has now posted our Round 1 2014-2015 recommendations on the
annual
plan grants to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees: http://goo.gl/Ea7d4I . [3]
With the support of the FDC’s two Board Representatives (Bishakha Datta
and
Frieda Brioschi), the WMF Board will review the recommendations and
then
make their decision on them by 1 January 2015.
This round, proposals came from ten chapters and one thematic
organization,
totaling requests of roughly $4.7 million USD. Before our face-to-face deliberations, which were held from 15-18 November, the FDC reviewed
the
proposals in careful detail, aided by staff assessments and analysis on impact, finances, and programs, as well as community comments on the proposals. Our conversations were intense and the decisions were not
easy;
each proposal was carefully considered both in its own context and environment, and strengths and concerned were discussed. We are recommending grants totaling roughly $3.8 million USD.
Now that the recommendations have been published, there is a formal
process
to submit complaints or appeals to the Board. Here are the steps for
both:
Any organization that would like to submit an appeal on the FDC’s
Round 1
recommendation should submit it to the Board representatives to the FDC by 23:59 UTC on 8 December 2014 in accordance with the appeal process outlined
in
the FDC Framework. A formal appeal to challenge the FDC’s
recommendation
should be in the form of a 500-or-fewer word summary directed to the
two
non-voting WMF Board representatives to the FDC (Frieda Brioschi and Bishakha Datta). The appeal should be submitted on-wiki, [4] and must
be
submitted by the Board Chair of a funding-seeking applicant. The Board
will
publish its decision on this and all recommendations by 1 Jan 2015.
Complaints to the ombudsperson about the FDC process can be filed by
anyone
with the Ombudsperson and can be made any time. The complaint should be submitted on wiki, as well. [5] The ombudsperson will publicly document
the
complaint, and investigate as needed.
Please have a look at the calendar [6] to see other upcoming milestones
in
the annual plan grants / FDC process.
Again, we offer our sincere thanks to the 11 organizations who
submitted
annual plan grant proposals to the FDC.
On behalf of the FDC,
Dariusz Jemielniak ("pundit", FDC Chair)
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2014-2015_round1
[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/20...
[4]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Appeals_to_the_Board_on_the_recom...
[5]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Complaints_about_the_FDC_process
[6] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Calendar _______________________________________________ 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
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
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