Thank you for covering the Berlin meeting in such detail, and for caring about governance developments even though they are removed from everyday work on the projects. I am glad to have been interviewed about this subject, but concerned about giving readers only one perspective of what is happening! This is a controversial and emotional topic, and no single participant can provide a neutral summary of it. My views are my own, and you would get different answers from others involved in these decisions.
I understood that this was part of a set of interviews with other attendees at the meeting. As you continue to cover these topics, please make a point of interviewing voices from a spectrum of the parties involved including the auditing, fundraising, and local-programs specialists of the movement. Regards, – SJ + 00:00, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect that most Wikipedia donors (the silent majority) are not involved in the chapters and do not want much of their money being funneled out to them. Can we point to specific improvements that these chapters have made to Wikipedia? With that said, I can't say I'm all that happy about how the Foundation seems to spend money either - it seems they hire a lot of "consultants" to say common-sense things rather than spending the money on developers to improve the remarkably aged technology. II | (t - c) 17:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
