On 20 March 2014 19:05, Lisa Gruwell <lgruw...@wikimedia.org> wrote: ... > ... The Stanton Foundation covered all of the costs > associated with it (approximately $50,000). While WMF provided advice and > posted the position on the Wikimedia Blog, Belfer made the final hiring > decision, which is customary in fiscal sponsorship arrangements. ...
Hi Lisa, I have been re-reading your statement and I feel there is some ambiguity over how this is being explained here versus how it might have been declared to others by the Stanton Foundation. To be clear, could you please confirm that the WMF has officially stated that: A. No grant or other money was ever taken or managed by the WMF for Sandole's project/job. B. The Stanton Foundation has never declared this as a grant for the WMF or for WMF projects. C. The WMF did not authorize or otherwise approve Sandole's project or appointment and has never employed Sandole. D. The WMF Fundraising department managed Sandole's contract[1] E. The WMF has neither paid tax nor claimed tax relief as a result of Sandole's project/job. F. No financial benefit has been gained by any organization due to the WMF claiming to be a "fiscal sponsor" of Sandole's appointment as no money has changed hands. I am aware that the statements may be contradictory, where this is the case is would be great if the position could be unambiguously clarified and the Wikimedia community could be pointed to what WMF legal consider official and final public reports, noting that what should be an official past report linked below has changed during this discussion. Links: 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Foundation_Report,_August_2012&diff=7907453&oldid=5390952 Fae -- fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
