Considering past incarnations of the "mission statement" or "goals" of the "community" or the stacked Board of Directors of the Wikimedia Foundation the date and specific content of the "current" mission statement dated 14 December 05 is very interesting.
Specifically the very first bullet: "creation of a new project (to check if its goals are within the current mission statement)".
In the past we have told potential donors "The Wikimedia Foundation Inc. is a non-profit organization with the goal of providing free knowledge to every person in the world. Meeting this goal through the maintenance, development and distribution of free content, Wikimedia relies on public donations to run its wiki-based projects." to solicit funds. Notice how the goals of a free online university or "Wikiversity.org" would fit with no effort whatsoever within the stated goal of providing "free knowledge to every person in the world".
The goals of a wikiversity are no longer such a clear fit now that the 14 December 05 resolution defines the goals of the Wikimedia Foundation specifically by currently existing and main page advertised projects. The timing is particularly interesting if one considers the 13 Nov 05 response of the Board to a proposal backed by a 200/268 filtered vote tally showing overwhelming support from the interested "community" members in initiating the Wikiversity.org as a formal project rather than an informal experiment within wikibooks.org. We might squeeze into "... other projects are envisioned." should the project advocates manage to rewrite the proposal to the Board's satisfaction. OTOH Surely the Board could rewrite the mission statement to its own (or Jimbo's or future donors') satisfaction should they decide to support the Wikiversity project in accordance with the community's well documented desires. I will be back soon with some further links to past mission statements and press releases issued in pursuit of public donations.user:lazyquasar
- Interesting. The resolution is almost verbatim from the Articles of Incorporation.
Were these bylaws not in effect until ratified by the stacked Board of Trustees or were they in effect and we were simply poetic in our press releases soliciting donations from the public? In either case apparently the "...other projects are envisioned." clause has been successfully used in the past and is supported by the currently stacked Board of Directors. So Wikiversity is well within the whim of the stacked Board of Directors. user:lazyquasar
One question and one comment.
The question : what does "stacked" board of Directors mean ?
One comment : this resolution is not "approved", it is a proposal and an invitation to discussion. I inspired myself from the bylaws, because the bylaws have been approved by the Founding members. I added other points, because I feel that it happened that some decisions were taken without the approval of the board, which to my opinion required the approval (or some decisions might be taken without, while I think board opinion mattered). I also started this page and others due to the feeling too many things were just said on irc or email, withouth being properly stated in a place where they could be found back. This is still experimental, and definitly does not mean this page will be approved by the board as is. The date is "not interesting" to be compared to the date of vote of wikiversity. It is mostly the result of personal thoughts on the matter. Finally, note that the goal of Wikiversity as we suggested to be rewritten fits in the current mission statement, while having editors transform themselves in online teachers and wikiversity provide diplomas does not fit in the current mission statement. Anthere