Why do they use a wiki for absolutely everything? Did Jimbo decide that everyone should use tools ill-designed for the purpose at hand, just because they are "free"?

That would explain the GFDL licensing, actually. Now, I'm going to go inflate my car tire with a free content, non-patented rock. That way I don't have to finance the evil air pump conglomerates who want to take my free rock.

Wikipedia is just a web site. All you need is a heap of servers. I don't think it ever occurred to anyone that they would need business skills. Hey, this is Web 2.0 - JFDI.

It reminds me of the .com boom where people were writing columns about how stupid old fashioned businesses were because they were bound in bureaucracy, whereas the likes of <name your favourite .com failure> didn't need that because they could just Do_It! Ernst Young were quite happy to lend 3 noobies £250k with an idea as long as we delivered it in March, when we said we needed November. We walked away, especially after realising that EY made money regardless, we signed our lives away and the VCs knew they were looking for the 1 in 100 punt.

WMF is the same - on the surface it is successful, but even after 4 years it hasn't dawned on them that they need business people to run the business. Sand and foundations, me thinks.

PS Yea, OpenOffice is an open source copy of Office, with a surprising number of carry-overs of bad ways to do things (like how pictures leap about the page if you are foolish enough to want to save or edit your document), however, for Windows users it is useful does include a free PDF generator. If OpenSource is so great, why are all their products clones of commercial ideas, often blatant rip-offs? I like FireFox, it went its own way, but why didn't someone sit down and start with a blank sheet of paper?

Tarantino, I have no idea what OpenOffice software is, but I'll assume it's some hippie-dippy Freelove version of Microsoft's monolithic Office suite. Is what you quoted above the sum total of the message? If there's more, please post it in its entirety.

Related to financial sustainability, the audit completed on our first three years of operations will be a major asset in the future. Such an audit is essential to get big donations and grants. It required a lot of effort in the past months, and hopefully the path in front of us is less steep.

Sue Gardner wrote:
> Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> Any update on the audit?
>>
>> Months ago we were hoping for completion during the fundraiser. How
>> are things going?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
> The audit is done; we're just waiting for board approval to release the
> financial statements. That'll probably happen within a few days :-)

Yup. I just came back from Davos last night, pretty tired. I published a
resolution on the board wiki, for the board to approve the release.
We have a board meeting the 31st. I expect this resolution will be
approved at that meeting.

Ant

FloFlo is teasing the peanut gallery with off-stage rumblings of a release of financial data.

However, usually-spot-on Anthony is warning us that we may only be privy to the financials this year, and not the audit firm's "recommendations for the future" document. Surely, we could practically write that document ourselves with two key points:

(1) Are you f**king serious that you hired a convicted felon to mangage your operations?

(2) Jimbo needs to stop comingling his self-dealing Wikia activities with those of the Foundation.

I love how this audit was supposed to be ready in late October, then before end of December, then before end of January, and now we're nearly a week into February and still no audited financials.

Greg

Note that the resolution "be and hereby are" is not understood and turned into a typo which the edit supposedly is removing.

That's the beauty of heading up an American non-profit with a French woman having no experience writing encyclopedias or running non-profits.

Also, notice that Jimbo wasn't just absent from the meeting, he was "missing". Someone should send out a search and rescue party!

Gotta love the FloFlo!

Greg

Here it is.

06:43 UTC February 08, 2008.

Our betting pool winner appears to be GlassBeadGame:

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...indpost&p=69820

...who was only 26+ hours off from the actual release.

We'll need GBG to confirm the donation to Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and let's talk about what we write on our check's "memo" field or in the PayPal "comments" field to get some attention.

Discussion on Foundation-l list.

I know this is just a fun game, but am I the only one who thinks these 11th-hour guesses are a bit unfair? They have the advantage of not guessing days already passed.

Does the Gates Foundation even accept small, unsolicited donations? If GBG wants the donation made there, please supply instructions.

I can’t speak for everyone, but I can speak for myself. I’m doing this for the child in Africa who is going to use free textbooks and reference works produced by our community and find a solution to the crushing poverty that surrounds him. But for this child, a website on the Internet is not enough; we need to find ways to get our work to people in a form they can actually use.
---Jimmy Wales, Sole Flounder

I would suggest giving the donation to Orphan Support Africa, which is largely funded by BMGF, although it itself is modest in size. This link goes directly the donation page.