On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 7:34 PM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29 August 2011 00:29, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Which other criteria are so onerous that folks are reacting > > like the letter indicts the entire system of chapters? > > > Because that's its effect: "The entire system of chapters, except > WMDE, is hereby recentralised. Thanks for your hard work, everyone!" > > Saying nice things about how much you like decentralisation does not > change the effect. > > > - d. > > Other than saying "You're recentralising the chapters by forcing us to raise / receive money through the WMF!" no one has really adequately described how this is the case. Chapters were only participating in the fundraiser for one year. Even then, they relied on the WMF to attract and refer donors. At worst, chapters are as decentralised as they were prior to the 2010 fundraiser. Accounting to the WMF for how money is managed and spent does not seem like such an extraordinary requirement that people should react as if the chapters were being scrapped. What did they want to do with the money that this is an impossible burden? _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
