View source for User:Seb35/summary future funding discussion

== [[Fundraising and Funds Dissemination/Goals|Goals of the process]] ==
 
 ----- '''[[Fundraising and Funds Dissemination/Goals|Content page]]''' -----
 
 Feeling, hopes, fears of participants about the process and future funding model
 
 - Sue Gardner:
   - well-working funding model
   - raise efficiently large amounts
   - fit our values and ethics
   - assume good faith, set aside personal fears, biases, self-interest, think for the WMV as a whole
   - sane and reasonable debate
 - Fæ:
   - we should guatantee timely reporting and appropriately detailed process transparency
   - reassure donors, volunteers and other stakeholders
   - high value of the outcomes
   - effectively and efficiently management of funds
 - Theo10011:
   - Wikpedian heavily involved in SP and movement roles, well-wisher for the chapters
   - hopes:
     - decentralized model with redundancies
     - accountability
     - performance linked incentives
     - decentralized chapter-based fundraising
     - model for chapter growth
     - general avoidance of catch-22 of tax-deductibility
     - continued support for outreach and GLAM
     - independance of chapters
   - fears:
     - no more continued projects like Toolserver
     - no more annual programs like WLM
     - one funding czar at WMF
     - grand-dependant existence
 - Jimbo Wales:
   - exact inverse of hopes and fears of Theo10011
   - fears:
     - "decentralized model with redundancies": irrational overlap and misallocation of funds due to no coherent guiding authority
     - "decentralized model with redundancies": lack of accountability, longterm rise in unjust "entitlement" attitude towards funding
     - No central authority at Wikimedia with a guiding vision -> leading to lower support for outreach in the developing world, complete lack of outreach for GLAM activities in the developing world
   - hopes:
     - model which reduces potential problems of large chapters in wealthy countries feeling entitled to funds without measurable objectives and achievements
     - both centralized vision to eliminate irrational overlaps/gaps while encouraging local decision-making on details (grant model with coherent metrics and objectives)
 - Stu:
   - WMF Treasurer and CFO in day job
   - spend time thinking about the two issues
   - fundraising hopes:
     - that raise enough funds to achieve our vision
     - that build enough reserves for the next few years
     - that build some kind of endowmnent
     - that attract engineering talent
     - that leverage our success engaging 500,000 donors into recruiting more editors (spring "editing drive" vs fall "fundraising drive")
     - that raise enough money to make every good idea can be funded
     - that decentralized capabilities to raise money with as few single points of failure as possible
   - fundraising fears:
     - that attract fewer volunteers because we are successful raising money
     - that some regulatory of PR mess forces us to miss an annual fundraiser
     - that increased financial reserves will make us more of a target for litigation
     - that our fundraising capabilities grow so much faster than our funds management capabilities
       - and we do something that alienates donors and editors
     - that we as a movement will somehow let all this money screw things up
   - funds dissemination hopes:
     - that we as a movement can really reach "every single human being," all 7 billion of them
     - that we can use our financial resources to seed new healthy volunteer communities in places they haven't yet developed on their own
     - that we can fill in the gaps of our volunteers' incredible efforts with paid resources
     - that we develop good funds dissemination processes so that any really good idea from within our movement gets funded quickly and efficiently
     - that we can help all organizations in the movement develop the right level of financial controls and leadership proceses to respect our donors contributions
     - that we eventually build decentralized capabilities to pursue the vision with as few single points of failure as possible
     - that we can start funding other like-minded organizations (e.g. Creative Commons) that are critical to our work but are less consumer-facing so might, relatively, have difficult raising money
     - that we succeed in building a software platform that can truly take our pursuit of vision to the next level, with native mobile capabilities and an editing interface that is as easy as contributing to Facebook
     - that we develop a movement-wide culture of performance/accountability to drive the highest-impact use of donor funds
   - funds dissemination fears:
     - that all of us in the movement somehow lose sight of the reality that there's plenty of money and instead let our egos and fears and suspicions lead us to spend our time fighting over money rather than inspiring new editors, doing things like WLM and GLAM, and otherwise pursuing the vision
     - that we let the same financial bickering which plagues the Olympic Committee, the U.N., FIFA, and other international organizations seep into our movement
     - that distraction over how funds get disseminated demotivates volunteers
     - that we won't scale the financial controls and financial management experience fast enough across our movement and have a financial crisis that hurts donor confidence and our global reputation
 - Craig Franklin:
   - great hope:
     - funds distribution process where everybody can live with
   - fears:
     - that while financial accountability and transparency are extremely important, that it will be used as a stick to further centralise control or prevent discussion of what the real issues might be
     - that we will sight of the fact that nobody in the movement has an overwhelming moral right to funding
     - that the WMF, which holds most of the cards in the game, will use their financial and legal muscle to impose a "solution" upon other parties without their consent
     - same controls for WMF as for Chapters (e.g. approval of budget and programmes); no real machinery for the community if WMF make poor decisions on how to spend the funds
     - if all eggs into the WMF basket, fear of a scandal which tarnish the reputation of everybody
     - that any arrangement does not allow for new or smaller chapters to receive money to professionalise, until they have professionalised
     - much as Stu has outlined, that arguing about money becomes a preoccupation instead of doing programme work
       - any future solution should be equitable, transparent, but also move quickly and be predictable in its operation
       - this way we can concentrate on the important stuff that we're all here for
 - Gomà:
   - fundraising hopes:
     - other models of fundraising than central sitenotices
     - get rid of banners one day
     - vital expenses covered by a capitalization fund
     - that each year that fund be increased to cover for the future costs we are causing by growing the database
     - processing-payment entities offers donors the best treatment and conditions
     - that donors could choose where their money is spent and through whom is collected
   - fundraising fears:
     - that the structure of the WMF and other groups grow generating fixed costs that are not guaranteed with recurring revenue
     - methods of fundraising we use make us to lose editors
     - efforts to raise funds divert time from editing
     - negative feelings like envy selfish or greed among different organizations based on different fundraising capacity
   - funds dissemination hopes:
     - be able to share financial resources with the same generosity with which we share knowledge
     - find mechanisms to align expenses with the priorities to invest the money where it is most needed, regardless of where it is collected
     - find mechanisms allowing each one feel heard in defining priorities
     - be able to release the initiative and creativity of community members by providing them funding for innovative activities
   - funds dissemination fears:
     - not enough transparency and control of funds
     - in order to have transparency and control we impose too heavy a bureaucracy
     - negative dynamics between paid staff and volunteer editors
 - Tomer A.:
   - fundraising hopes:
     - be able to collect all needed funds
   - fundraising fears:
     - that while talking about fund-raising and fund-dissemination, we loose sight of the real goal
     - that we do not pursue new fundraising models
     - lesser and lesser decentralized fundraising
     - that while collecting more money, we undermine the pillars the movement is built upon
   - funds dissemination hopes:
     - find a model everyone can live with
   - funds dissemination fears: (note: it is written "fundraising fears" but I assume it is a bad copy-paste, given the context)
     - that we cannot find such a model
     - that we’ll end up with a model that most players aren’t happy with

 ----- '''[[Talk:Fundraising and Funds Dissemination/Goals|Talk page]]''' -----
 
 [[Talk:Fundraising and Funds Dissemination/Goals#Replying to Jimmy|Replying to Jimmy]]
 -> Theo10011:
    - fears of decentralization: related to systemic efficiency and efficiency of management
      - first (irrational overlap and misallocation):
        - the trade-off for this one seem negligible in comparison to the perceived benefits
        - more as a problem based solely in poor inter-coordination between chapters
        - on his POV, there are concerns but not enough to abandon the model
      - second, first part (lack of accountability):
        - accountability is a decorrelated problem on his POV
      - second, second part (unjust entitlement toward fundraising):
        - indeed a problem
        - suggests performance linked incentives
    - aggree the need of a strong central org
    - he would like to avoid conflict, overlap and hierarchy between central org and others
    - aggree with the last hope (both a centralized vision to avoid overlap/gaps while encoraging local decision-making of details)