Here's my personal hit parade of Ryan Kaldari quotes.
Regarding the Wikipedia Review / MyWikiBiz pages on "why you shouldn't donate to the Wikimedia Foundation":
That page is so full of misinformation, it hardly warrants commentary...
Regarding a conversation where he mostly agreed with me that the Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikipedia community are mostly helpless to stop paid editing of Wikipedia, he closes with:
I still believe that Kohs has gone far beyond being a useful
critic. Yes, he has points that are worth discussion, but that doesn't
mean we have to overlook his disruptive behavior. He clearly has an axe
to grind and intends to grind it. We don't have to facilitate that.
Regarding a proposal to restore my rights to post to Foundation-l mailing list:
If you guys want to invite Kohs back to the list, I'll be happy to
unsubscribe myself.
Regarding my critique of his "WikiLove" program:
I'm not sure why you expect to get any sympathy from me. You insulted my work on every major tech blog on the internet. And as usual, it was with misinformation and insinuation, not facts. I'm sure you don't actually care, but the Wikimedia Foundation didn't waste millions of dollars on developing WikiLove. It was a project that I built on my own initiative, on my own time, as a volunteer. (I work for the fundraising department, not features development.) The Foundation endorsed it and asked me to add a few features, but they certainly didn't waste a lot of money on it. If you thought it was a dumb project, fine, but using it to criticize the Foundation was just adding insult to injury.
Regarding a survey that the WMF hosted, where any respondent could complete the survey as many times as he or she liked, and could forward it to as many friends as they wanted, because it was a one-URL-welcomes-all sampling design, Kaldari was asked, "Would you still contend that the survey was constructed in a way that would minimize skewed results?":
Yes, since the survey specifically asks how how those people use and
interact with Wikipedia. If your friends are not active users of
Wikipedia, the results would show that. If they are active users and
contributors then their opinions would be weighted accordingly.
Regarding the "blackout" of the Italian Wikipedia:
The WMF isn't allowed to lobby for or against legislation, per our 501c3
non-profit status in the US.
Note: Kelly Martin responded to that notion...
The statement is also wrong. Non-profits may lobby for or against legislation, when the legislation is relevant to their purpose as a non-profit; virtually all responsible non-profits have, at some time, issued a policy statement related to some proposed legislation, and some non-profits do little but. What non-profits may absolutely not do is campaign for or against a candidate for office. In any case, whoever said that the WMF is not permitted to lobby for or against legislation (apparently Ryan Kaldari) is an idiot. But we already knew that.
Regarding the fact that Charity Navigator had given the Wikimedia Foundation only one star on the measure of organizational efficiency:
The reason Charity Navigator gives the Wikimedia Foundation 1 star for organizational efficiency is because we spend a very small percentage of our funds (virtually none) directly on educational resources (our service/product). Instead we spend the money on developing software and supporting our volunteer community since they are the ones who create the educational resources. The is the opposite of what philanthropic donors traditionally look for in a non-profit. Traditionally, you want as much of your money as possible to go directly towards the end product or service. You don't want a thousand middlemen all taking a cut. In our case, however, the thousand middlemen are all unpaid volunteers, so it doesn't make a difference. Thus our organizational "inefficiency" is actually a strength rather than a weakness.
So, it's kind of like a fraternal organization that spends some of its money on helping kids with cancer, but most of the money goes to the big festivals and dinner parties for the members to "network" with one another. Got it, Ryan. Got it.