Requests for Comment/Premium offerings (in-house proposal)


 * Summary: An alternative to Requests_for_Comment/Premium_offerings, this proposal puts forth the seeds and basis of Miraheze premium wikis which would be part of Miraheze Limited, the current nonprofit company headquartered on the United Kingdom, without signing a contract with an extraneous private entity.

Institutional and financial basis

 * Miraheze Premium will only be a service provided by Miraheze Limited. The service is available to monthly donors over a certain threshold.
 * This means that Miraheze Premium is not a separate corporate entity, nor is the sole proprietorship of anyone affiliated with Miraheze or anyone else.
 * The purpose of Miraheze Premium is to finance the continuing operation of Miraheze community wikis.
 * The existing monetary channels for donations are used to "pay" for Miraheze Premium.
 * There is no separate finance. The "pay" for Miraheze Premium is just a regular recurring donation to Miraheze Limited.
 * Under no circumstances should this service be confused for a separate organization.
 * Since there is no external proprietorship, this removes any possible financial incentive for running the premium service in a way that is not conductive to Miraheze's community-centric goals.

Technical basis

 * Miraheze Premium wikis have load-bearing tasks unlocked and the full developer options, with no (or almost no) grayed-out options in the wiki management sections. They can have files over the regular size limits and have other limitations removed. Extra extensions, which would be prohibitive to have in all Miraheze wikis, will be enabled on Miraheze Premium.
 * Miraheze Premium wikis can access a bot service and additional related support.
 * Miraheze Premium wikis will have an automatic exception in the Dormancy Policy because they help fund the project. This kind of exceptions have been manually handed before, with the same reasoning.
 * Miraheze Premium wikis are hosted in the same clusters as regular Miraheze wikis. This incentivizes that regular Miraheze users get benefitted from the arrangement, even if they can't reach the monthly average donation score.
 * The existence of Miraheze Premium would thus make the whole infrastructure more robust and stable.
 * A Miraheze Premium volunteer team will be established within the wiki, so that regular systems engineers and global admins aren't overburdened by Premium tasks. This also allows Premium wikis to have a dedicated team.
 * Such team works wholly within the purview of the Miraheze Community, including the Board of Directors, and the Stewards.

Advantages

 * In-house development means existing Miraheze infrastructure to be used, reducing the workload.
 * Contrast: In the parallel proposal, using a wholly different infrastructure means more servers need to be maintained.
 * Pooling the servers means that existing Miraheze wikis will be more stable, by sharing increased server capacity to house the premium wikis.
 * Contrast: In the parallel proposal, additional external infrastructure and services will not benefit existing Miraheze in any way.
 * Administrative tasks are simplified.
 * Contrast: As per the other scheme, two wholly separate teams are needed, with one operating as a separate company. This company would not even have access to Miraheze's database, servers or infrastructure, which is tremendously inefficient and undermines the concept of " a premium Miraheze service".
 * Financial tasks are simplified, as the same Donation scheme is used, allowing Miraheze to fully audit its own finances and integrate immediately the Premium money as its own funding.
 * Contrast: As per the other proposal, the WikiForge was started with an intention to be a separate company, and thus will have its separate finances and have to audit costs internally. If costs of operation are allegedly not met, WikiForge will not give money to Miraheze at all, even while taking in Premium subscriptions.
 * There is no need to have "contracts", binding or otherwise, with anyone.
 * Contrast: In the other scenario there is the conflict of interest of a Nonprofit Organization signing a contract with its own Technical Director (which can vote for their own proposal) as a private party.

Disadvantages

 * There will be no monetary incentive to parallel private entities (if this can be said to be "disadvantageous", well, it may be for such party's private interest).

Support
(Voting is "not yet open before comments", probably. The "Support as proposer" came baked in with the form page.)--NimoStar (talk) 09:45, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1)  as proposer. NimoStar (talk) 09:45, 14 April 2023 (UTC)