Hoi,
Fund raising costs money. It affects effectivity negatively. For this
reason it is a poor strategy to raise funds.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 26 November 2014 at 13:16, Dariusz Jemielniak <darekj(a)alk.edu.pl> wrote:
Let me reiterate: the FDC definitely DOES NOT try to
dump fundraising on
the chapters.
However, we recognize that sometimes funding or inkind support is
available more easily than elsewhere. We once had a situation that a
chapter declared they could get external funding easily for a projected
they applied for to the FDC, but they just didn't. Some chapters have a
possibility to get office space for free or at a reduced price. Etc. It
would just make sense to think if the movement's resources sparingly.
If funds are not available, or if one tries and fails - that's totally
fine.
Best
Dj
26 lis 2014 09:42 "rupert THURNER" <rupert.thurner(a)gmail.com>
napisaĆ(a):
While I understand the arguments of the fdc in
the light of the policies
they are bound to, what you Gerard write , really hits the core of the
challenge we are facing.
What I find the most hypocritical is that the wmf and the fdc want to
dump
other organizations into fundraising adventures
the wmf with all its
professionalism tried and found unsatisfactory. when sue Gardner startet
there were four income channels. First, Business development, which never
gave income. Second, get money from the rich, which gave a glorious
conflict of interest discussion e.g. when virgin doubled part of the 2006
fundraiser. I never heard of this one again. Third, get money from the
dead aka applying for grants to other foundations. This proved expensive
compared to the result, mostly giving restricted funds which then
resulted
in problems with reporting the success. Many of
the chapters face this
today. And fourth, as now only remaining cornerstone, get money from the
poor, aka fundraising banners on the website.
The wmf today plays two roles, spending money and owning the website, and
with it deriving the single right to collect money of it. Which is an
inherent conflict of interest imo responsible for 99% of the
inefficiencies
we have today, including the local focus brought
up by Gerard.
Rupert
On Nov 26, 2014 8:05 AM, "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hoi,
With all respect, these are pennies to the pound. When you have people
working professionally the choice is very much: are they to do a job or
are
they to raise funds and do a job. To do the
latter effectively it takes
two
> because the skills involved are different.
>
> I completely agree that it is possible to raise much more money.
However,
in the
current model where the foundation monopolised fund raising and
not
doing the best possible job the amounts raised
are not optimized.
Currently
it is not needed. The notion that all money
raised should go in one pot
is
foolish because the reality is that several
chapter opt out of the
process
> altogether. Several of these make more money than they can comfortably
> handle BUT cannot share for legal reasons,
>
> What we have is a political correct monstrosity that does not what it
is
supposed
to do under the notions of political correctness. It would be
much
> better when the whole process of fundraising and spending was changed
in
such a
way that the process became more equal, A process where the
chapters
can more easily take up jobs they are suited for.
Why for instance have
developers go to the USA while they can live really comfortable in
countries like India where there is an abundance of really smart and
educated people ? Why not have technical projects run in India? (I know
reasons why not but they are not the point).
We do not have metrics for many jobs. What we have we do not apply
equally
or divide on equal terms.
Thanks,
GerardM
NB Wikidata is underfunded
On 25 November 2014 at 21:25, Anders Wennersten <
mail(a)anderswennersten.se>
wrote:
> As Nathan I see no contradiction.
>
> I would feel embarrassed if WMSE had used FDC funding in their
project
> > to get more female contributes. Also as it is rather easy to get that
> > funded from within Sweden and semi-government financing organisations
> (but
> > not for WMF to "get" that money for general use)
> >
> > But I feel quite comfortable that FDC money was used to buy the
camera
that was used by a volunteer in ESC 2013 to take
photos that has been
uploaded to Commons and used in 60+ versions and been viewed almost a
million times and believe our small donors would approve of that use
Anders
Nathan skrev den 2014-11-25 20:45:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Liam Wyatt <liamwyatt(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>> Both of these policies are internally consistent and logical,
however I
> >>> believe that they are at least partially contradictory. I believe
the
FDC
>>> is working on the best advice it has available, and I know that I
have
>>> not
>>> read *all *the most recent documentation about Chapter finances.
But,
I
>>> would like to know if there is a
policy position from the WMF Board
of
>>
Trustees that clarifies what is expected of Chapters in this area.
>>
>
> Can you elaborate just a little on how you find them to be
contradictory?
>> If we assume, as I think is reasonable, that the first principle
applies
> >> to
> >> funds raised by WMF and the second is directed at funds raised by
> >> individual affiliates, they don't seem to me to be in conflict.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >> Wikimedia-l(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>