On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27 April 2014 15:01, Bence Damokos <bdamo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> What is currently stopping a community assessment from being carried >> out? (If indeed the community has the actual desire to do it -- I >> assume the data is as public as it gets at the WMF's current level of >> transparency.) >> >> Best regards, >> Bence >> > > > In the past, the WMF budget and programmatic proposals were separate from > all others, and were widely advertised as the WMF proposal. Now they are > buried in "FDC proposal" with no specific metion that there is a WMF > proposal there. I've seen no banners. I got a personal talk page message > because I'd been identified as a "useful" person to comment. > > In other words, there is much less transparency or effort to reach out to > the broader community for the WMF proposal, which is radically different > from all other proposals. It might just have been me, but I seem to recall big banners on Wikipedia advertising the fact that the WMF's proposal was up for review (among the others). In any case, as someone who has followed the WMF's budgets over the year, I rarely do recall any formal community consultation (apart from their non-core proposal last year to the FDC), so this is a welcome step in the right direction. (I find it difficult to get on board with the implied argument that the fact that other organisations are as transparent or more at the same time as the WMF is a bad thing).
Best regards, Bence > > Risker > _______________________________________________ > 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> _______________________________________________ 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>
