Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation • Hacker News Board

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#31

Post by mhh__ » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:25 PM UTC

Zababa wrote: post #24

> We have a deep and stable financial position that will help us grow and protect us from any storm, and the trust in our projects has never been higher. They earned 9 millions more than last year, from 120 millions to 129 millions, and spent 21 millions more, from 91 millions to 112 millions [1], with an increase of 10 millions in "awards and grants". The donations grew by 10 millions. If I read the financial statem…

I think a loss of 100% of one's income is probably a risk so deep into the tails that planning for it is by definition a little stupid.

Edit: For a company - apart from Welfare you should have a plan as an individual

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#32

Post by mikepurvis » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:26 PM UTC

not2b wrote: post #28

Zababa wrote: post #24

> We have a deep and stable financial position that will help us grow and protect us from any storm, and the trust in our projects has never been higher. They earned 9 millions more than last year, from 120 millions to 129 millions, and spent 21 millions more, from 91 millions to 112 millions [1], with an increase of 10 millions in "awards and grants". The donations grew by 10 millions. If I read the financial statem…

Most nonprofits can't last long "if donations stop". Why would they stop? I give every year and so do many others.

Indeed, and I'm not sure it would be a defensible position to just be stashing your donated funds into a gigantic rainy day war chest— the money is there to spend on growing and fortifying the service in other ways, so it should be spent.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#33

Post by awhitby » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:26 PM UTC

iso8859-1 wrote: post #2

I didn't know my Wikipedia donations funded parties in Accra, Berlin and Chandigarh. I think that should be been in the fundraising statement.

I have no connection to and don't know Wikimedia Foundation, and the context for these references is not totally clear. (Maybe it was related to these https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_20/Events.)

Regardless, do you really begrudge the CEO visiting these places?

I get where you're coming from: it's easy to roll your eyes and dismiss this kind of thing as political correctness, pointless "diversity and inclusion" work, pandering to liberal friends etc.

But step back: Wikipedia aims to be the world's encyclopedia. I'm as much in awe as anyone of what a fairly narrow group of pretty obsessive contributors has been able to achieve (I just checked: I've made five tiny edits in 15 years, so not me). But Wikipedia will never succeed in its aim unless it has active contributors in places like Accra, Berlin and Chandigarh.

I honestly don't remember what the donation banners have said in past years. Did they imply they were funding servers and bandwidth only? Maybe they did. But if you actually believe in the mission of Wikipedia, you have to consider that servers and bandwidth will not be enough and that community—maybe including the odd party—is a core part of it.

In that respect, I'm not sure it's too helpful to lump it with Mozilla.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#34

Post by jonas21 » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:27 PM UTC

jahlove wrote: post #11

iso8859-1 wrote: post #2

I didn't know my Wikipedia donations funded parties in Accra, Berlin and Chandigarh. I think that should be been in the fundraising statement.

They also spent $2.8m on travel and conferences in 2019 [0], which is more than they spent on internet hosting... [0] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/3/31/Wikim... (page 13)

This seems like the typical HN meme of looking at something and assuming the technical piece is all there is to it.

Wikipedia's biggest challenge over the years hasn't been building or hosting its website. It's been convincing the world that an encyclopedia that can be edited by anyone on the Internet is a credible and neutral source of information.

One of the ways you do that is by speaking at conferences, traveling to meet with people, etc.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#35

Post by mikepurvis » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:27 PM UTC

h_anna_h wrote: post #23

Aunche wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can support just Wikipedia by contributing ;) I think that Wikipedia just doesn't need that much money. If people just let them fail their fundraising goals, the core service will likely continue to get the same budget, but they'll cut their pet projects and parties.

Sadly this is not what happened with Mozilla.

Isn't it? Mozilla has cut or spun-off basically everything other than Firefox.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#36

Post by matthewmacleod » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:27 PM UTC

ndiscussion wrote: post #7

iso8859-1 wrote: post #2

I didn't know my Wikipedia donations funded parties in Accra, Berlin and Chandigarh. I think that should be been in the fundraising statement.

Sadly just like Mozilla. Most of these charities are a lavish waste.

“Lavish waste” my arse.

You people will be dissatisfied so long as there is a nonprofit worker out there who isn’t subsisting on gruel.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#37

Post by mhh__ » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:28 PM UTC

jahlove wrote: post #11

iso8859-1 wrote: post #2

I didn't know my Wikipedia donations funded parties in Accra, Berlin and Chandigarh. I think that should be been in the fundraising statement.

They also spent $2.8m on travel and conferences in 2019 [0], which is more than they spent on internet hosting... [0] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/3/31/Wikim... (page 13)

Is that all that bad considering that Wikipedia is arguably one of the most important organisations on earth?

If it was as corrupt as the NRA (which is why NY is moving to dissolve them), then I would agree with the sentiment but a few million sounds about right (About 9k per employee)

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#38

Post by tristor » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:28 PM UTC

mikepurvis wrote: post #32

not2b wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most nonprofits can't last long "if donations stop". Why would they stop? I give every year and so do many others.

Indeed, and I'm not sure it would be a defensible position to just be stashing your donated funds into a gigantic rainy day war chest— the money is there to spend on growing and fortifying the service in other ways, so it should be spent.

The proper way for non-profits to do this is to start an endowment fund, which provides consistent residual income that can help fund operations. Usually by identifying specific large donors who would wish to be named in the fund.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#39

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:29 PM UTC

Zababa wrote: post #24

> We have a deep and stable financial position that will help us grow and protect us from any storm, and the trust in our projects has never been higher. They earned 9 millions more than last year, from 120 millions to 129 millions, and spent 21 millions more, from 91 millions to 112 millions [1], with an increase of 10 millions in "awards and grants". The donations grew by 10 millions. If I read the financial statem…

[deleted]

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#40

Post by tomca32 » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:29 PM UTC

iso8859-1 wrote: post #2

I didn't know my Wikipedia donations funded parties in Accra, Berlin and Chandigarh. I think that should be been in the fundraising statement.

I've been involved with some non-profit organizations that do work in post conflict countries, mostly Africa.

From my experience, these organizations throw parties because they have to. This is how non-profits fundraise. I don't think there is a non-profit organization on the planet that has a significant impact and is funded only by small individual donations. Money is raised by throwing a party, presenting all the great work you're doing, and getting rich people drunk so they either give you right there and then or secure you a meeting with someone who will on the spot.

These events are funded by your small donations.

This sounds like a horrible amount of overhead, and it is, but that's how the world works. Most NGOs will say they have very small overhead, something silly like 5%, but that's because they don't count fundraising as overhead, or they put fundraising events into "programming" which again doesn't count as overhead.