Hoi,
I have said before that we spend our money not equally over our audience.
Less than 50 % of our traffic is English Wikipedia and less than 40% of the
world population speak English well enough. Consequently we spend too much
on English.
It is stupid to suggest that we should defund our current projects that
primarily benefit English but we have the luxury to spend more on other
languages, cultures and audiences. There are plenty of pocket money
projects that will have a big impact on the smaller projects and will gain
us an insight on what we are missing in our sum of available knowledge. The
big thing is too leave the big project mentality behind us. Be bold,
experiment, learn from experiments and advertise the positive and negative
results. Regroup, think again and experiment again.
The question is do we dare to experiment leave some conventions behind us
that are ill fitting in other projects. Do we dare to spend more to achieve
more and ignore those "who know best".
When the outcome of this strategy thing is that we need to partner more,
consider what we have not considered then all the additional money has been
worth it.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 23 July 2017 at 19:01, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gerard,
>
> On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 5:39 PM, you wrote:
>
> Arguably we do not spend enough, we could achieve more.
> >
>
> I would say that it is about spending money differently, not just more.
> However, here are some things that one could achieve for a modest $2.5M, as
> suggested in a thread on this list in January – considering the enormous
> surplus value accruing to the Foundation as a result of the work of the
> Community, any or all of these suggestions seem to be to be quite modest
> returns to the Community for that work.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> 1. Fully-paid bursaies to Wikimania 2017 for one person from each of the
> 250 largest projects;
> 2. Purchase one reference book or similar for the 30,000 most active
> content contributors;
> 3. Purchase a one-year JSTOR subscription for the 10,000 most active
> content contributors;
> 4. Local travel bursaries to Wikimedia meetups and conferences for 50,000
> members of the Community;
> 5. An office with ten staff paid for a year to resolve the requirements for
> improved tools from the Community Tech programme.
>
> One could imagine folding some of these into the endowment at 4% as
> follows:
> 1'. Funding for 10 Wikimania bursaries per year for ever;
> 2'. Funding for 1,000 books per year for ever;
> 3'. Funding for 400 JSTOR subscriptions per year for ever;
> 4'. Funding for local travel for 2,000 people per year for ever.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
