R*******n
发帖数: 162 | 1 校友基金一直把收到的捐款和支持公开, 这个很好,也使得校友更叫信任校友基金.
但是现在还马上有从extrarebate / fatwallet的commission的收入.
不知道这笔收入如何公开? 如果做到公开了还保护每个人的个人信息?
希望想出一个有效的办法. |
n*****g
发帖数: 626 | 2 I guess you worry that USTCAF may list all the MITBBS ids like
what OCEF is doing.
No, we will never do that. It depends on what info FatWallet or
ExtraRebates release to USTCAF by the time they issue the check
to us (quarterly). As far as I know, they may NOT release any
donor info -- otherwise they could be sued. So the donation may
be just listed under the name of FatWallet or ExtraRebates
on AF website.
So for someone with huge rebates and wishes to get tax benefit, it
is better to get the c
【在 R*******n 的大作中提到】
: 校友基金一直把收到的捐款和支持公开, 这个很好,也使得校友更叫信任校友基金.
: 但是现在还马上有从extrarebate / fatwallet的commission的收入.
: 不知道这笔收入如何公开? 如果做到公开了还保护每个人的个人信息?
: 希望想出一个有效的办法.
|
R*******n
发帖数: 162 | 3 如果这样的话, 怎么知道extrarebate/fatwallet把每笔钱都给了USTCAF? 他们要是扣
下一些, 捐款人和ustcaf根本就不知道了? |
n*****g
发帖数: 626 | 4 Yes, that could be a problem. FatWallet is not transparent at all, so
we have to reply on their words.
ExtraRebates gave USTCAF an account to check realtime transaction to
AF account -- but there is no way to figure out who made the donation.
But if donor informs AF, we can at least make sure every transaction
goes thru.
【在 R*******n 的大作中提到】
: 如果这样的话, 怎么知道extrarebate/fatwallet把每笔钱都给了USTCAF? 他们要是扣
: 下一些, 捐款人和ustcaf根本就不知道了?
|
R*******n
发帖数: 162 | 5 如果这笔钱没法监督， 那可能会影响ustcaf的信誉。看起来USTCAF需要设立一种方法
来监督这笔钱， 比如说由board上的人一起管理。 国内的许多基金会都有腐败丑闻，
希望我们USTCAF从制度上就制止这种可能。基金会这方面一直很好， 希望在这点把这
个漏洞补上。 |
n*****g
发帖数: 626 | 6 There is no problem on AF side -- we always post whatever received
online. Internally we also have several people to check the accounting
integrity.
There is always similar problem when the 3rd party got involved,
for example, someone may donate to United Way, then United Way
should forward the money to AF -- but sometimes United Way never
forward the money.
，
【在 R*******n 的大作中提到】
: 如果这笔钱没法监督， 那可能会影响ustcaf的信誉。看起来USTCAF需要设立一种方法
: 来监督这笔钱， 比如说由board上的人一起管理。 国内的许多基金会都有腐败丑闻，
: 希望我们USTCAF从制度上就制止这种可能。基金会这方面一直很好， 希望在这点把这
: 个漏洞补上。
|
z*****m
发帖数: 119 | 7 最近听说基金会要在北京开设基金，并聘请全职工作人员，有些朋友都收到邮件。不知
该消息是否属实？能否证实一下？ |
n*****g
发帖数: 626 | 8 I am not spokesperson for the fund in Beijing, so the following
info is only reflecting what AF knows --
The fund in Beijing is tentatively called "USTC Initiative Fund",
legally speaking it is independent of USTCAF although it serves
our common cause in helping USTC and its people. It has its own
unique advantage as an organization based in China. (Just like
AF has its unique advantage as an 501(c)(3) organization
registered in USA)
The IF(Beijing) and USTCAF closely work together, a subfund B
【在 z*****m 的大作中提到】
: 最近听说基金会要在北京开设基金，并聘请全职工作人员，有些朋友都收到邮件。不知
: 该消息是否属实？能否证实一下？
|
n**h
发帖数: 694 | 9 看到这个4年前nanobug的帖子，感触良多。
现在两个基金会不能够合二为一，那么就不要内耗了，各自干各自的，都是为科大服务。
发信人: nanobug (nanobug), 信区: USTC
标 题: Re: 给USTCAF 的一个建议
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Jan 24 01:35:19 2007)
I am not spokesperson for the fund in Beijing, so the following
info is only reflecting what AF knows --
The fund in Beijing is tentatively called "USTC Initiative Fund",
legally speaking it is independent of USTCAF although it serves
our common cause in helping USTC and its people. It has its own
unique advantage as an organization based in China. (Just like
AF has its unique advantage as an 501(c)(3) organization
registered in USA)
The IF(Beijing) and USTCAF closely work together, a subfund BJAA
under AF was set up for this project, more than $36K was donated
to BJAA subfund by some high profile alumni working with the
IF(Beijing). See
http://www.ustcaf.org/c/f?l=af/s/a&w=cfn-afs&s=BJAA
As far as I know, the salary for their fulltime staff will not be
paid from the BJAA subfund (AF's bylaw actually prohibits that).
BJAA subfund will only be used for specific project approved
by USTCAF Governing Board. And the spending will be recorded online.
I assume in a matter of weeks, the IF(Beijing) will make some formal
announcement regarding their plan or even existence :)
【在 n*****g 的大作中提到】
: I am not spokesperson for the fund in Beijing, so the following
: info is only reflecting what AF knows --
: The fund in Beijing is tentatively called "USTC Initiative Fund",
: legally speaking it is independent of USTCAF although it serves
: our common cause in helping USTC and its people. It has its own
: unique advantage as an organization based in China. (Just like
: AF has its unique advantage as an 501(c)(3) organization
: registered in USA)
: The IF(Beijing) and USTCAF closely work together, a subfund B
|
n*****g
发帖数: 626 | 10 Then it is very clear USTCIF is misleading public with their
so called "history". How can I post such article in Jan 2007
when there was some "agreement" between AF and IF in 2006?
If USTCIF wants to maintain its credit among USTC alumni,
please stop misleading USTC alumni.
务。
【在 n**h 的大作中提到】
: 看到这个4年前nanobug的帖子，感触良多。
: 现在两个基金会不能够合二为一，那么就不要内耗了，各自干各自的，都是为科大服务。
:
: 发信人: nanobug (nanobug), 信区: USTC
: 标 题: Re: 给USTCAF 的一个建议
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Jan 24 01:35:19 2007)
: I am not spokesperson for the fund in Beijing, so the following
: info is only reflecting what AF knows --
: The fund in Beijing is tentatively called "USTC Initiative Fund",
: legally speaking it is independent of USTCAF although it serves
|
|
|
n**h
发帖数: 694 | 11 看了一下你说的IF网站中的段落（见下）。感觉和你2007年初的帖子没有本质的矛盾呀。
2.2 与USTCAF沟通
新创基金与（海外）校友基金会（USTCAF）也是“合作但独立”的关系。
新创基金是海外校友基金会(USTCAF)11年努力的延伸与继续，新创基金可视为USTCAF努
力的继续；而USTCAF是新创基金的美国合作伙伴。倡议新创基金的校友中，不少长期在
USTCAF工作，或是USTCAF长期支持者与主要捐款人。
新创基金之筹备，得到了USTCAF的明确支持。蒋澄宇、刘志峰负责了与USTCAF的沟通。
2006年8月1日，新创基金第一次筹备会召开后，筹委会向USTCAF通报。9月29日新创基
金第二次筹备会议中，王维嘉、蒋华等特别强调了与USTCAF携手合作重要性；确认将新
创基金定义为 USTCAF在中国的延伸，并请蒋澄宇、刘志峰负责与USTCAF沟通。蒋澄宇
赴美拜会USTCAF2006届理事会主席刘冬子，并与USTCAF创始人、财务总监张上游电话沟
通。周全回美也与刘冬子见面。双方确认，USTCAF与新创基金要团结合作，共为科大建
设强大校友基金努力。双方同意，在新创基金架构确定后，双方将签署合作谅解备忘录。
【在 n*****g 的大作中提到】
: Then it is very clear USTCIF is misleading public with their
: so called "history". How can I post such article in Jan 2007
: when there was some "agreement" between AF and IF in 2006?
: If USTCIF wants to maintain its credit among USTC alumni,
: please stop misleading USTC alumni.
:
: 务。
|
n*****g
发帖数: 626 | 12 Did I ever reach any "agreement" with Jiang Chengyu and Zhou Quan?
If NOT, then USTCIF is misleading? Anything wrong with that LOGIC?
呀。
【在 n**h 的大作中提到】
: 看了一下你说的IF网站中的段落（见下）。感觉和你2007年初的帖子没有本质的矛盾呀。
: 2.2 与USTCAF沟通
: 新创基金与（海外）校友基金会（USTCAF）也是“合作但独立”的关系。
: 新创基金是海外校友基金会(USTCAF)11年努力的延伸与继续，新创基金可视为USTCAF努
: 力的继续；而USTCAF是新创基金的美国合作伙伴。倡议新创基金的校友中，不少长期在
: USTCAF工作，或是USTCAF长期支持者与主要捐款人。
: 新创基金之筹备，得到了USTCAF的明确支持。蒋澄宇、刘志峰负责了与USTCAF的沟通。
: 2006年8月1日，新创基金第一次筹备会召开后，筹委会向USTCAF通报。9月29日新创基
: 金第二次筹备会议中，王维嘉、蒋华等特别强调了与USTCAF携手合作重要性；确认将新
: 创基金定义为 USTCAF在中国的延伸，并请蒋澄宇、刘志峰负责与USTCAF沟通。蒋澄宇
|
p*********e
发帖数: 32207 | 13 原文里面说"确认"而没说"达成协议"吧?
这两个词强度还是不同的.英文agreement似乎强度更接近后者.
【在 n*****g 的大作中提到】
: Did I ever reach any "agreement" with Jiang Chengyu and Zhou Quan?
: If NOT, then USTCIF is misleading? Anything wrong with that LOGIC?
:
: 呀。
|
n**h
发帖数: 694 | 14 原文说的是“双方确认，USTCAF与新创基金要团结合作，共为科大建设强大校友基金努
力。双方同意，在新创基金架构确定后，双方将签署合作谅解备忘录。”
这个和offical agreement是不一样的。
他们说和你见面的时候有“USTCAF与新创基金要团结合作，共为科大建设强大校友基金
努力”的共识。当然你可以说你和他们没有在谈话中有此类共识。只有你们之间知道谈
了什么。
但是我们作为围观者，看到你2007年初的帖子对IF还是很正面的，也谈到了AF和IF的合
作项目。以常识来看IF说当初“双方确认，USTCAF与新创基金要团结合作，共为科大建
设强大校友基金努力。双方同意，在新创基金架构确定后，双方将签署合作谅解备忘录
。”并非不靠谱。
【在 n*****g 的大作中提到】
: Did I ever reach any "agreement" with Jiang Chengyu and Zhou Quan?
: If NOT, then USTCIF is misleading? Anything wrong with that LOGIC?
:
: 呀。
|
n*****g
发帖数: 626 | 15 Who are "they"? Your friend Joe Liu? "以常识来看IF说当初...并非不靠谱。"
Is this really what the best you and Joe Liu can do? You see, according
to 常识, Gold Medal means No. 1 :)
How do you know what I said or not said to Jiang Chengyu and
Zhou Quan? Why do you intentioanlly left out the sentence
"双方同意，在新创基金架构确定后，双方将签署合作谅解备忘录。”?
Did I "agree"?
In Jan 2007, USTCIF does not exist officially, there was only a
"BJAA subfund" under USTCAF (see my original post) -- which according
to USTCAF bylaw is part of USTCAF asset. Then where is the "agreement"
between AF and IF in 2006 before IF even announced its existence?
Where is this 常识? :)
If there is such "agreement", Joe Liu will be very eager to post to
IF website. Now he can only play this type of game to mislead people
to whitewash IF history. There was indeed some agreement between
AF and IF in Aug/Sept 2007 timeframe(among different set of people),
why didn't Joe Liu report that? Well, maybe there is sth in that
agreement that Mr. Joe Liu is not happy about, which have triggered
his effort to sabotage USTCAF operation ever since.
One has to wonder what happend between Jan 2007 when I was obviously
in support of USTCIF and Nov 2010 when I obviously hold such low regard
to USTCIF. That's what I will talk about if Joe Liu does not delete
my name from his website -- it is a very simple request.
Please pass this to your friend Joe Liu.
Thank you,
Dongzi Liu(854/8500)
【在 n**h 的大作中提到】
: 原文说的是“双方确认，USTCAF与新创基金要团结合作，共为科大建设强大校友基金努
: 力。双方同意，在新创基金架构确定后，双方将签署合作谅解备忘录。”
: 这个和offical agreement是不一样的。
: 他们说和你见面的时候有“USTCAF与新创基金要团结合作，共为科大建设强大校友基金
: 努力”的共识。当然你可以说你和他们没有在谈话中有此类共识。只有你们之间知道谈
: 了什么。
: 但是我们作为围观者，看到你2007年初的帖子对IF还是很正面的，也谈到了AF和IF的合
: 作项目。以常识来看IF说当初“双方确认，USTCAF与新创基金要团结合作，共为科大建
: 设强大校友基金努力。双方同意，在新创基金架构确定后，双方将签署合作谅解备忘录
: 。”并非不靠谱。
|
