Re: [Foundation-l] Funding for the newly elected Board Members

--- Delirium <delirium-88qmZGEba/[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
> This is something I feel somewhat strongly about, especially since 
> someone mentioned how other organizations routinely do it: they are most 
> definitely not models to emulate.  A great many non-profit organizations 
> are inefficient, wasteful, and often simply corrupt, with a relatively 
> small percentage of their money going towards their actual stated mission.

Travel and phone expenses for meetings are part of the basic operating expenses
of any organization. This is called overhead. Yes many organizations have
overhead expenses that are absurd, but that does not mean we will. We just need
to state up front in our budget the maximum percentage we will allow for
overhead. 

I propose that that percentage be 10% of the general fund, allowing for 90% of
all money from that fund to be used on hardware and (perhaps eventually)
bandwidth/colo expenses. Other funds could also be set-up (such as a developer
bounty fund and a legal defense fund). But a fund devoted just to something as
unexciting as overhead will be doomed from the start. 

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

PS: IMO, any full time paid personnel (such as a on-site server admin, 
software developer, and eventually Jimbo) would be paid with money from
specific large grants from money-giving foundations. At least in the mid term,
I do not think that our current revenue stream can be depended upon to meet
payroll. Thus we need multi-year large grants to pay for that. 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com