[announcement] new staff member in business development

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
85 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in businessdevelopment

Casey Brown-2
Just make sure you know that I asked Anthony to take a step back from the
computer and cool-off, way before I called him a troll.

Cbrown1023

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael
Bimmler
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 10:05 AM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] [announcement] new staff member in
businessdevelopment

On 5/20/07, Casey Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Thirded, but I think it is quite obvious from my responses to Anthony that
I
> think he is a troll.
>
This is nothing personal against you but can we stop this right now?
If anyone else wants to talk to Anthony about whether he is a "troll"
or not, do it in private and *off-list*.
I have already said this in a post to the list once
(http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-May/030030.html)
and I repeat my statement: Accusing each other of trolling in public
only stimulates flame wars and is not
in any other way helpful to this list. The next unlucky person who
decides to entertain the list with ad personam comments about other
subscribers risks being moderated.

Thank you
Michael


> Cbrown1023
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Alison
> Wheeler
> Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 9:03 AM
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] [announcement] new staff member in business
> development
>
> On Sun, May 20, 2007 13:26, Robert Leverington wrote:
> > Please Anthony, stop being a troll. You are being completely ignorant
and

> > rude.
>
> Seconded.
>
> > On 20/05/07, Anthony <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> Leasing servers instead of purchasing
> >> them is one factor which should help a great deal.
>
> Leasing equipment is what you do when you need the option to be able to
> cancel it should trading conditions turn against you and you no longer
> need the equipment (which is not the case with WMF - we *know* that our
> usage will continue to increase not decrease) -or- you want to be able to
> mark down the lease / interest payments against your tax liability, again
> which does not apply to WMF.
>
> As Robert got to saying first, please be constructive and don't troll.
>
> Alison Wheeler
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in business development

Thomas Dalton
In reply to this post by Anthony DiPierro
> Then you could sue me, and I'd countersue you for violating the GFDL.
> What part of "add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this
> License" don't you understand?
>
> If you're currently forcing datafeed recipients to agree not to
> redistribute the data they receive, then you're in major breach of the
> GFDL.  Not just the relatively minor breaches that have been going on
> for so long, but you've subverting the very essence of copyleft.

It depends what you mean by "reselling the datafeed". If we're talking
about making a new datafeed from your servers to your client and
sending the data you get from the Wikimedia datafeed, then there is
nothing anyone can do the stop you, but that's not really reselling
the datafeed, it's just reselling the data. If you mean somehow giving
your customers access directly to the Wikimedia datafeed, so that they
are using Wikimedia's bandwidth, then the GDFL doesn't cover that -
it's that which I would assume is forbidden by contract.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member inbusinessdevelopment

Casey Brown-2
In reply to this post by Florence Devouard-3
We should all know that the Foundation raises MILLIONS. :)  However, I think
what Anthony doesn't understand is that money is used in many different
ways.  We have to pay for servers, maintenance, we have to pay the staff, we
have to pay for the domain, we're currently giving away scholarships to
Wikimania... there's a lot of stuff that that money goes to and there are a
lot more places we would like send it if we had more money. :)

Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Florence
Devouard
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 10:14 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] [announcement] new staff member
inbusinessdevelopment

Anthony wrote:
> On 5/20/07, Casey Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> You seriously do not understand the inner-workings of this organization.
We
>> do not have "millions of dollars" right now, we have enough to get by and
>> probably some more, but we definitely do not have the large amount you
are
>> talking about.
>
> I'm sorry if I implied that the WMF currently had "millions of
> dollars".  The fact is I have no idea how much the WMF currently has,
> as it stopped regular disclosure of this information years ago and
> hasn't yet resumed doing so.


WMF is regularly disclosing information about the MILLIONS of dollars
raised by donations.

Regularly is probably about every minute or so.

Please check http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/

There is history of donations since january 2006.
Prior data may be found in audited financial statements for the past 3
years, available here: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Finance_report

The donation website was set up end of 2006. It is a huge improvement
over past reporting system.

Ant


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in business development

Anthony DiPierro
In reply to this post by Thomas Dalton
On 5/20/07, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > Then you could sue me, and I'd countersue you for violating the GFDL.
> > What part of "add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this
> > License" don't you understand?
> >
> > If you're currently forcing datafeed recipients to agree not to
> > redistribute the data they receive, then you're in major breach of the
> > GFDL.  Not just the relatively minor breaches that have been going on
> > for so long, but you've subverting the very essence of copyleft.
>
> It depends what you mean by "reselling the datafeed". If we're talking
> about making a new datafeed from your servers to your client and
> sending the data you get from the Wikimedia datafeed, then there is
> nothing anyone can do the stop you, but that's not really reselling
> the datafeed, it's just reselling the data.

Fair enough - that's what I meant.  Taking the stream of data, copying
it, and distributing it to others.

> If you mean somehow giving
> your customers access directly to the Wikimedia datafeed, so that they
> are using Wikimedia's bandwidth, then the GDFL doesn't cover that -
> it's that which I would assume is forbidden by contract.
>
No, I didn't mean that at all.

Anthony

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in businessdevelopment

Jimmy Wales
In reply to this post by Anthony DiPierro
I would like to ask that Anthony be placed on moderation or simply  
kicked off the list
completely.

There is such a thing as honest dissent and debate.  And there there  
is trolling.

On May 19, 2007, at 3:36 PM, Anthony wrote:

> On 5/19/07, Casey Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Anthony:
>>
>> May I enquire as to why your e-mail address is wikilegal?
>>
> Yes, you may.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member inbusinessdevelopment

Anthony DiPierro
In reply to this post by Florence Devouard-3
On 5/20/07, Casey Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
> We should all know that the Foundation raises MILLIONS. :)  However, I think
> what Anthony doesn't understand is that money is used in many different
> ways.  We have to pay for servers, maintenance, we have to pay the staff, we
> have to pay for the domain, we're currently giving away scholarships to
> Wikimania... there's a lot of stuff that that money goes to and there are a
> lot more places we would like send it if we had more money. :)
>
Please, there's no need for you to accuse me of not knowing this.

Of course I know that the money is used, and I know to a large extent
how it's used.

Anthony

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in business development

Yonatan Horan
In reply to this post by Andrew Gray
a) I was thinking of a mediawiki implementation (and here's an evil idea,
include it in the version everybody uses so they have to manually remove it
if they don't want to). That avoids the whole edit war thing.

b) Good point, but I don't see anyone removing the 20k links to amazon we
currently have.

c) Good point.

d) Actually they [should be] link[ing] to the page that has the image on it,
not directly to the image on amazon's servers, at least from what I
understand.

To everyone else, how about we try coming up with ideas on how to help the
foundation make more money rather than perpetuating this off topic flame
fest? I'd personally like to hear if any of my other ideas were
good\bad\stupid.

-Yonatan

On 5/20/07, Andrew Gray <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 19/05/07, Yonatan Horan <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Perhaps but the unavoidable fact is that we currently have 26,000 links
> to
> > amazon, many of them being sources for pictures, sources in articles or
> > otherwise non-policy violating links. Even if they are violating policy,
> if
> > we aren't removing them, the referral might as well be added. Also,
> there's
> > Special:Booksearch for which one could add the referral id to
> amazon\Barnes
> > and Noble links.
>
> a) Adding it to special:booksearch, one centrally generated URL, is a
> relatively sensible move. Adding it to anywhere *else* means that we
> have to manually patrol each and every use of the URL in order to add
> the referral ID, and check it doesn't get changed to another referral
> ID, and deal with people who will editwar to keep them out
>
> b) most material "sourced" from Amazon can be more appropriately
> sourced elsewhere
>
> c) it is inappropriate to give our editors a motive, no matter how
> well-meaning, to encourage the use of links to *specific* sales sites
> in articles. It effectively will create a single, or a group of,
> recommended commercial partners.
>
> d) as you say, a sizable fraction of those links are appropriate
> "image sourced from this URL" - and, as such, they link directly to
> the image generation URL. No-where to put a referral link, and no
> benefit to anyone from doing so...
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>   [hidden email]
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff memberinbusinessdevelopment

Casey Brown-2
In reply to this post by Anthony DiPierro
Sorry, make that *didn't*.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Anthony
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 12:22 PM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] [announcement] new staff
memberinbusinessdevelopment

On 5/20/07, Casey Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
> We should all know that the Foundation raises MILLIONS. :)  However, I
think
> what Anthony doesn't understand is that money is used in many different
> ways.  We have to pay for servers, maintenance, we have to pay the staff,
we
> have to pay for the domain, we're currently giving away scholarships to
> Wikimania... there's a lot of stuff that that money goes to and there are
a
> lot more places we would like send it if we had more money. :)
>
Please, there's no need for you to accuse me of not knowing this.

Of course I know that the money is used, and I know to a large extent
how it's used.

Anthony

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in business development

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Thomas Dalton
Thomas Dalton wrote:

>>Yeah, and since your contract agreement at $100 explicitely does not
>>allow you to resell the feed to a third party, you would engage into
>>illegal activity as well.
>>    
>>
>That's a much more definite point. A datafeed involves a contractual
>agreement between the two parties, so you can impose whatever
>restrictions you like. A simple sale of a tangible item does not.
>
What the statutes say is only one part of the law; actual enforcement is
quite another.  If Anthony buys for $100 and sells for $200 who is going
to feel inclined to go across the country to begin a legal action to
recover damages.  The worst damage that can be done to him in practical
terms is to cut off his data feed.  At that point he can perhaps restart
it with another name and account until that too is discovered.

Restrictions that are not easily enforceable are a waste of time.  The
movie and recording industries are rapidly discovering that.  Copyright
law has been looking more foolish every day.  What made it work in the
past was the sheer impracticality of infringement.  Industry could
expand the restrictiveness of re-use because there weren't enough people
to care about writing NPOV into copyright law.

What has changed is that people copying a DVD can produce a high quality
copy and don't see themselves as doing anything wrong.  When copying was
from a vinyl record to tape it could be done at home but the quality was
often not there.  The process was also slower and more tedious.  Now
that the technical restrictions are gone, except for the artificial ones
like DRM gimmicks, few people see anything wrong in personal copying and
distributing copies to friends.  Sure, it's a form of disrespect for the
law, but respect for law depends on a perception that the law is fair.  
As Wikipedians we tend to see law mostly in terms of intellectual
property and libel law, but to those who focus on that limited range of
law I can only say, "You ain't seen nothin' yet."

For us it means that we should not base policy on unenforceable law.

>>Datafeed is one of the way we can make money. Which will allow us to pay
>>the accountant.
>>Which will allow us to provide all the financial information you are
>>noisily requesting.
>>If you count in "actual cost" uniquely the bandwidth cost, $100 could
>>make it. But running an organization uniquely counting as cost, the
>>bandwidth, is seriously being out of it.
>>    
>>
>It's a matter of priorities. Is it more important to get as much free
>information as possible out there right now, or to be still able to
>get free information out in a year's time? Anthony seems to believe
>the former, you the latter. Both are valid points of view.
>
Yes.  Without product there is no profit; without profit there is no
product.  At some point along the way it takes more than altruism to
keep the horse running.  We have yet to delve into the broader economic
and social impacts of such a project.  We are assembling intellectual
capital, but we have yet to reconcile that with more traditional forms
of capital.

Ec


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in business development

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Anthony DiPierro
Anthony wrote:

>On 5/20/07, Florence Devouard <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>
>>Anthony wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On 5/19/07, Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>Anthony a écrit :
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>But I think the main issue has nothing to do with the IRS.  It's a
>>>>>matter of focus.  Developing a profitable business competes with the
>>>>>maximum production and distribution of content.  Charging maximum
>>>>>prices for data feeds reduces the dissemination of the data.  Charging
>>>>>licensing fees to DVD distributors raises the prices of the DVDs and
>>>>>thus reduces the number of DVDs which are distributed.  Etc, etc (*).
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>I think this is false, because we deal with digital and free content.
>>>>
>>>>It is not because you sell a datafeed to one organisation at one prize
>>>>that you sell it to everybody at the same price. Same logic for DVDs.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Interesting.  I don't think that would be feasible for datafeeds
>>>though, and I'm pretty sure it isn't feasible for DVDs.  In the case
>>>of DVDs, if you tried to sell them to different groups for different
>>>prices, you'd simply see people resell the DVDs (engage in arbitrage).
>>>      
>>>
>>Reselling one or two DVD would not be a big deal.
>>However, engaging into a real reselling activity of a DVD using
>>trademarks which you are not authorized to use for a commercial
>>activity, is illegal.
>>    
>>
>Umm, how so?  Check out eBay sometime, or half.com (have they gotten
>rid of that yet?).  People resell DVDs using trademarks which they
>aren't authorized to use for a commercial activity *all the time*.
>Besides that, it's most certainly not illegal.
>
Oh?  How can eBay possibly check out whether something offered for sale
is pirated?  What would it need to do just to check whether DRM has been
disabled on a particularly?  As long as they ask no questions nobody
will tell them any lies.  How many potential buyers are going to
complain about pirate material when they could be getting a bargain?  
Not illegal sounds more like not real.

>>>I think this would happen for datafeeds as well, if they were ever
>>>accessible to the regular public.  If I as an individual could buy an
>>>en.wikipedia datafeed for $100/month (which would probably be more
>>>than enough to cover WMF's actual costs), the WMF wouldn't be able to
>>>charge companies $5000/month, because if they did I'd just step in and
>>>resell my $100/month datafeed for much less than $5000.
>>>      
>>>
>>Yeah, and since your contract agreement at $100 explicitely does not
>>allow you to resell the feed to a third party, you would engage into
>>illegal activity as well.
>>    
>>
>Then you could sue me, and I'd countersue you for violating the GFDL.
>What part of "add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this
>License" don't you understand?
>
It's not a matter of who could sue, but of who would.

>If you're currently forcing datafeed recipients to agree not to
>redistribute the data they receive, then you're in major breach of the
>GFDL.  Not just the relatively minor breaches that have been going on
>for so long, but you've subverting the very essence of copyleft.
>
>I seriously hope your current contracts don't do that.
>
That's too speculative for me.

>>>And I think the WMF *should* be willing to sell unrestricted datafeeds
>>>to *anyone* for little more than its actual costs.  This is in line
>>>with maximizing the useful distribution of free content, which is
>>>after all the purpose of the WMF.
>>>      
>>>
>>Datafeed is one of the way we can make money. Which will allow us to pay
>>the accountant.
>>Which will allow us to provide all the financial information you are
>>noisily requesting.
>>    
>>
>The millions of dollars in donations you've collected is another way
>to pay an accountant.
>
We're not reallt talking about the specific allocation of funds.  The
accountant's fees here are only symbolic of a greater basket of
expenses.  Donations are a fickle way of funding an organization.  Some
operations require more stable funding.

>>If you count in "actual cost" uniquely the bandwidth cost, $100 could
>>make it. But running an organization uniquely counting as cost, the
>>bandwidth, is seriously being out of it.
>>    
>>
>The organization is going to be run regardless of whether or not the
>datafeed is given.  Counting all the costs of running the organization
>when calculating the marginal cost of providing a datafeed, is
>seriously being out of it.
>
On the basis of that model I would recommend that WMF invest in large
quantities of Duck Tape.

Ec


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member inbusinessdevelopment

Philippe Beaudette
In reply to this post by Florence Devouard-3
Anthere -

I had no idea that site existed... it's very cool.  I'm impressed.

Philippe
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Florence Devouard
  To: [hidden email]
  Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 9:14 AM
  Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] [announcement] new staff member inbusinessdevelopment


  Anthony wrote:
  > On 5/20/07, Casey Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
  >> You seriously do not understand the inner-workings of this organization.  We
  >> do not have "millions of dollars" right now, we have enough to get by and
  >> probably some more, but we definitely do not have the large amount you are
  >> talking about.
  >
  > I'm sorry if I implied that the WMF currently had "millions of
  > dollars".  The fact is I have no idea how much the WMF currently has,
  > as it stopped regular disclosure of this information years ago and
  > hasn't yet resumed doing so.


  WMF is regularly disclosing information about the MILLIONS of dollars
  raised by donations.

  Regularly is probably about every minute or so.

  Please check http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/

  There is history of donations since january 2006.
  Prior data may be found in audited financial statements for the past 3
  years, available here: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Finance_report

  The donation website was set up end of 2006. It is a huge improvement
  over past reporting system.

  Ant


  _______________________________________________
  foundation-l mailing list
  [hidden email]
  http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in business development

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Anthony DiPierro
Anthony wrote:

>On 5/20/07, Pierre Beaudouin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>
>>To be constructive, do you have some ideas to collect more money ? What
>>should be change during the next fundraising ?
>>    
>>
>First step is to publicly distribute monthly financial statements and
>a detailed budget which minimizes unnecessary costs.  
>
Sure, better financial reporting would help; quarterly would be
adequate.  Good budgetting practice would also bring transparency to the
situation.  Opaque finances only too easily makes people suspicious even
where there is no real cause to be suspicious.

>The rest of the
>details really come from how much if any shortfall results from that.
>I suspect there won't be any, so long as the budget really does
>minimize unnecessary costs.  
>
That all depends on how you define unnecessary costs.  A grest deal of
setting budgets depends on informed guesswork.  It involves allowing for
some margin of error in our guesses.  The more optimistic assumptions
should indeed project a shortfall, but that would also include wishlist
expenditures that can easily be dropped if revenue expectations are not met.

>Leasing servers instead of purchasing
>them is one factor which should help a great deal.
>
I've already expressed my disagreement with you on that.  Leasing is
only the better option when your blinders  limit  your perspective to
short term cash flow.  Things are quite different when you think in
terms of a three plus year plan.

Ec


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in business development

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Alison M. Wheeler
Alison Wheeler wrote:

>On Sun, May 20, 2007 13:26, Robert Leverington wrote:
>  
>
>>Please Anthony, stop being a troll. You are being completely ignorant and
>>rude.
>>    
>>
>Seconded.
>  
>
>>On 20/05/07, Anthony <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Leasing servers instead of purchasing
>>>them is one factor which should help a great deal.
>>>      
>>>
>Leasing equipment is what you do when you need the option to be able to
>cancel it should trading conditions turn against you and you no longer
>need the equipment (which is not the case with WMF - we *know* that our
>usage will continue to increase not decrease) -or- you want to be able to
>mark down the lease / interest payments against your tax liability, again
>which does not apply to WMF.
>
Yes and no.  Leasing companies like to bind their clients for the life
of the contract whether or not you need the equipment.  Having an option
to cancel on short notice (30 days or less) will likely imply higher
monthly payments.  ... but then I don't like leasing in either event.

>As Robert got to saying first, please be constructive and don't troll.
>
Anthony has raised some points that absolutely need to be discussed, but
which unfortunately involve themes that are familiar to only a very few
people.  I regret the accusatory tone which sometimes creeps into his
comments, but I believe that his analyses are important even if
personally I often disagree with them.

Ec


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in business development

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
GerardM wrote:

>Hoi,
>What Anthony conveniently forgets is how we are going to pay for it all.
>Yes, we want to get as much expose our data in as many ways as possible.
>That is something we agree on. Fact is that the WMF is underfunded, it could
>do much more if it had money to act on its convictions.
>
Absolutely!  And this is exactly why these topics need more not less
discussion.

Ec


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member inbusinessdevelopment

Florence Devouard-3
In reply to this post by Philippe Beaudette
Philippe Beaudette wrote:
> Anthere -
>
> I had no idea that site existed... it's very cool.  I'm impressed.
>
> Philippe

You're welcome. If you lose the link, you may find it back from the
fundraising page
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fundraising

In the past, donations were tracked more or less manually by Daniel
Mayer. Over time, we naturally needed something more organised.
This website has essentially been set up by David Strauss when Brad was
executive director.

The site still needs some improvements imho (perhaps graphic reports).
There are still some oddities (such as the links at the top, mentionning
Wikipedia and Commons, but not the other projects, no idea why).
There is a link "recent posts" leading nowhere. Not sure what it is for.
A search system might be cool.

But overall, this is a great site. Very helpful.

Ant


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in business development

Anthony DiPierro
In reply to this post by Ray Saintonge
On 5/20/07, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Anthony wrote:
> >On 5/20/07, Florence Devouard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>Reselling one or two DVD would not be a big deal.
> >>However, engaging into a real reselling activity of a DVD using
> >>trademarks which you are not authorized to use for a commercial
> >>activity, is illegal.
> >>
> >>
> >Umm, how so?  Check out eBay sometime, or half.com (have they gotten
> >rid of that yet?).  People resell DVDs using trademarks which they
> >aren't authorized to use for a commercial activity *all the time*.
> >Besides that, it's most certainly not illegal.
> >
> Oh?  How can eBay possibly check out whether something offered for sale
> is pirated?  What would it need to do just to check whether DRM has been
> disabled on a particularly?  As long as they ask no questions nobody
> will tell them any lies.  How many potential buyers are going to
> complain about pirate material when they could be getting a bargain?
> Not illegal sounds more like not real.



This doesn't have anything to do with DRM or piracy.  Buying a DVD and then
reselling that exact DVD is protected under the doctrine of first sale,
which applies to both copyright and trademark law.

Anthony
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in businessdevelopment

Anthony DiPierro
In reply to this post by Jimmy Wales
On 5/20/07, Jimmy Wales <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I would like to ask that Anthony be placed on moderation or simply
> kicked off the list
> completely.
>
> There is such a thing as honest dissent and debate.  And there there
> is trolling.


If ya can't beat 'em, call 'em a troll.  Good show.

Anthony
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in business development

Jimmy Wales
In reply to this post by Michael Bimmler

On May 20, 2007, at 10:16 AM, Michael Bimmler wrote:
> I certainly think that discussion is a good thing and I do not wish to
> censor critical comments, even I think it is highly important that the
> Foundation is open, transparent and open to public criticism. But this
> needs be done with a certain decency, respect and should be done in a
> constructive rather than destructive way.

I just wanted to quote this to highlight the GOOD in this community.  
Michael is absolutely right.

We need to have the good judgment to distinguish between serious open  
discussion about problems and opportunities and dishonest
trolling.  And to simply invite the trolls to leave.  We do this on  
the wiki all the time.  We need to do the same on the mailing list.

--Jimbo

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in businessdevelopment

Jimmy Wales
In reply to this post by Anthony DiPierro

On May 20, 2007, at 10:27 AM, Anthony wrote:

> Any idea how much the cost is to the WMF to add a datafeed client?  As
> I've said, I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is.  Give me a
> datafeed, at 2x cost, with no restrictions on reselling it.  I'll set
> up a non-profit organization dedicated to distributing the data, and
> I'll take out a $25,000 personal loan at prosper.com which I'll turn
> around and reloan to the non-profit at the same interest rate.  I'll
> then set up a server with a MySQL database containing the data and
> offer shell accounts on the server for $10/month.
>
> Deal?

Honest to god, and I am not a relgious man, I hope the Foundation  
takes you up on this bluff,
Anthony.

--Jimbo

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [announcement] new staff member in businessdevelopment

Anthony DiPierro
On 5/20/07, Jimmy Wales <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> On May 20, 2007, at 10:27 AM, Anthony wrote:
> > Any idea how much the cost is to the WMF to add a datafeed client?  As
> > I've said, I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is.  Give me a
> > datafeed, at 2x cost, with no restrictions on reselling it.  I'll set
> > up a non-profit organization dedicated to distributing the data, and
> > I'll take out a $25,000 personal loan at prosper.com which I'll turn
> > around and reloan to the non-profit at the same interest rate.  I'll
> > then set up a server with a MySQL database containing the data and
> > offer shell accounts on the server for $10/month.
> >
> > Deal?
>
> Honest to god, and I am not a relgious man, I hope the Foundation
> takes you up on this bluff,


Good, that's one board member down.  Any other takers?

I'm sure as one of the 100 most influential people in world you could make
it happen.  Use that persuasive power.  It should be a no-lose offer for
everyone.

Anthony
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
12345