RationalWiki talk:RationalWiki Foundation
So, um, why does the Foundation's liabilities negate our assets?
Radioactive Misanthrope 02:45, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Record keeping
I have marginal familiarity with budgets and other financial record keeping. Feedback on this is particularly welcome, though feedback on any aspect of the Foundation will always be appreciated and addressed seriously. tmtoulouse 02:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Wish I could help. In five or so years when I finish my accounting degree, I would love to help, but as it is I don't even know the difference between assets and liabilities (see above).
Radioactive Misanthrope 02:45, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
[edit] not in good standing
according to new mexico corporations records, rationalwiki foundation is a corporation not in good standing. is anyone concerned?--58.163.175.134 (talk) 11:05, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- No. Especially since you've left no reference to check up on. The Spikey Punk I'm punking my punk! 11:21, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- Looking into this further, this "In good standing" and "Not in good standing" only has to do with tax filing records. Since we really didn't make a taxable income last year (much less than the $5000 threshold), this make sense. So, no, I'm even less concerned. The Spikey Punk I'm punking my punk! 11:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- I am aware of the situation, and will fix it. It has to do with a miscommunication. Tmtoulouse (talk) 19:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Meeting
Rumour has it that there was a board meeting a week or so ago. Is that right? Peter mqzp 23:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Shhhh!
Radioactive Misanthrope 01:20, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Oh, right. Sorry. Peter mqzp 02:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, there was. What of it?
talk 14:33, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Minutes?--Bob"I think you'll find it's more complicated than that." 14:38, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yes there are minutes.

14:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- ...and are we going to see them at some point? I remember that in January there was no disagreement on the "we need more communication" point, but if anything you've gone backwards. Peter mqzp 19:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Oh really? Or are you assuming that the person responsible for preparing the minutes wasn't faced with a big job because we covered a lot of business and that she's not working on them as you voice your self entitled complaint? I just told you there are minutes. I'm sure Godot is deeply sorry. Apologize to Peter, Godot. I know a week is a long time to wait.

20:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- That's all I wanted to know (and a bit more). Peter mqzp 20:59, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- EC. So being sarcastically offensive to an editor who asks about the minutes is the new board policy? How dare minions ask questions!--Weirdstuff (talk) 21:02, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- No. That's jumping to conclusions. Nice. Two non-board members participated in the last meeting. Nothing's secret. I have no idea who you are so I don't know if you're aware that minutes have historically been posted. Who was "sarcastically offensive"? "If anything" rules out other possibilities, one of which I pointed out, and assumes something other than diligence. That's not asking questions. It's insulting. Got any specific questions or do you want to have a meta-conversation? I've always been happy to answer what I can, and I've answered quite a lot when asked...

21:43, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- So you were not being sarcastic when you wrote: "I'm sure Godot is deeply sorry. Apologize to Peter, Godot. I know a week is a long time to wait."? Frankly, I don't believe you.--Weirdstuff (talk) 06:39, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
- No. That's jumping to conclusions. Nice. Two non-board members participated in the last meeting. Nothing's secret. I have no idea who you are so I don't know if you're aware that minutes have historically been posted. Who was "sarcastically offensive"? "If anything" rules out other possibilities, one of which I pointed out, and assumes something other than diligence. That's not asking questions. It's insulting. Got any specific questions or do you want to have a meta-conversation? I've always been happy to answer what I can, and I've answered quite a lot when asked...
- Oh really? Or are you assuming that the person responsible for preparing the minutes wasn't faced with a big job because we covered a lot of business and that she's not working on them as you voice your self entitled complaint? I just told you there are minutes. I'm sure Godot is deeply sorry. Apologize to Peter, Godot. I know a week is a long time to wait.
- ...and are we going to see them at some point? I remember that in January there was no disagreement on the "we need more communication" point, but if anything you've gone backwards. Peter mqzp 19:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yes there are minutes.
- Minutes?--Bob"I think you'll find it's more complicated than that." 14:38, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, there was. What of it?
- Oh, right. Sorry. Peter mqzp 02:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
In most institutions, minutes are approved at the following meeting, and they are not official until then; this is intended to make sure the minutes reflect what was said. Technically, only motions and the results of voting (approved or not) need be reported (i.e., what was decided) as well, and at that level of detail, minutes are often boring. Minutes are not necessarily the best form of communcation for any organization. There wasn't much progress toward discussing new projects, if that's what you want to know, more just the status of the foundation as a nonprofit and how we treat our donors.
talk 22:07, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Under the current system if you're involved you know everything (hopefully), if you're in contact with the right people you know a fair bit, but if you are in neither position then you aren't even aware that there was something to know. Can I suggest that something be done about that in future? As it happens those last two things you mentioned are exactly what I want to know about, but now that I've been told that the minutes are indeed on their way I am perfectly prepared to wait. Peter mqzp 22:19, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Then ask. It's unlikely your specific questions will be answered if you don't.

22:36, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- right, that's it. I demand all those currently on the board be stood down to be replaced by a manatee in heat. Only then can we get the representation we deserve. Acei9 22:43, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Ace, your comment is offensive and discriminatory. There are in fact, a great number of sea mammals that could perform the role just as well as any manatee. To ensure that the southern hemisphere is appropriately represented, I'm adamant that a dugong is appointed. VOXHUMANA 06:54, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
- What kind of hat though? I think maybe a homburg, but may be a little old-fashioned these days. SophieWilder 22:54, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Minutes are generally not available till they've been signed off by a Board member, under normal protocol. Just to make sure everything makes sense. Anyhow, i sent a draft out to the Board, then lost my mother board on my puter and had to wait till today to read comments. So CHILL. :-)
Godot The ablity to breath is such an overrated ability 22:57, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for this very reasonable clarification. It's a shame that we had to go through the unnecessary drama above to get to it.--Weirdstuff (talk) 06:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
- Minutes are generally not available till they've been signed off by a Board member, under normal protocol. Just to make sure everything makes sense. Anyhow, i sent a draft out to the Board, then lost my mother board on my puter and had to wait till today to read comments. So CHILL. :-)
- right, that's it. I demand all those currently on the board be stood down to be replaced by a manatee in heat. Only then can we get the representation we deserve. Acei9 22:43, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Then ask. It's unlikely your specific questions will be answered if you don't.