I've been following this thread with great interest -- this is a subject that fascinates me, and that I've put a lot of thought into. In particular, I looked into a variety of ways to approach introductions when working with Sarah and Lori Byrd Phillips to plan GLAMcamp DC.

The consistent theme here, I think, is a desire to balance two things: (1) a desire for everyone to be introduced to everyone else, and (2) a desire to create a space for more intimate and participatory connections, that go beyond a sentence or two.

At GLAMcamp DC, with some solid advice from Eugene Eric Kim (CC'd here), I ended up choosing:

(1) a general BRIEF introduction, paired with:

(2) a more structured activity that allowed people to go into more depth in smaller groups.

I know that adding this kind of structure to an event can feel cheesy and forced, but I think it's worth considering anyway, if it helps you to achieve objectives that are in tension. Without a bit of structure, and with 100+ people (or even 30) in a short period of time, a less-planned "everyone listens to everyone else" format means that everybody in the room is spending A LOT more time listening than talking.

I blogged about how I came to this particular format here: http://wikistrategies.net/glamcamp-dc-plan/

But the more useful links, probably, are the ones on the specific formats Eugene suggested to me (any of which might be worth considering for the WikiWomen's Lunch as well):
I hope these ideas are useful -- and am very interested in any other formats people might have experience with, or comments/questions on these ones.

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]


On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Valerie Aurora <valerie@adainitiative.org> wrote:
I do really like having these kinds of introductions - I am always
amazed by the breadth and variety of interests that people have and it
is a good lesson for me about my stereotypes and assumptions about
women I haven't overcome yet.  It's also a great way to find people
you want to meet.

But I agree it took too long.  That introduction format worked really
well at AdaCamp DC - for a variety of reasons that didn't apply at
that lunch and I wasn't even aware of during the AdaCamp intros.  You
can get through 125 introductions of that form very quickly if you
have:

* Good models to start the introductions off by adhering strictly to
the (very short) format
* Strict reinforcement of the format whenever people start to get wordy
* Two microphones so you don't have mike-passing time in between intros

I first saw this style of introduction at FOOCamp, which has it down
to a science, but it's harder than it looks, as we found. :)

My two cents is that the lunch should be longer!  I like to schedule
at least an hour and half. :) Overall, I was thrilled with the whole
lunch.

-VAL

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Gillian White <whiteghost.ink@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree that 125 introductions is not a productive or fun way to use a short
> amount of time. In this instance, the process halted all conversation and
> created a no-win situation for members of the audience - either try to
> concentrate on an impossible-to-remember roll-call, or ignore the speakers.
> Neither is good and leaving the room would be even more impolite. However,
> it is good to have a problem that results from success!
>
> A solution depends on what the purpose of the meeting is. If the purpose
> changes from a lunch meeting, different approaches could be used but
> multiple meetings or more scheduled talks should probably become strands of
> the conference. The trick is to balance structure and lack of structure in
> line with the principles and purpose.
>
> Assuming the meeting continues to be a lunch meeting, I think the principles
> that need to be remembered for such an event involving such a number of
> people are:
> - there is not much time and that time has to allow for eating (IMHO that
> does not mean wandering around trying to hold food and talk at the same
> time);
> - anything repetitive is bound to be tedious;
> - since there is a major conference in session, anything formal, other than
> a welcome from Sue, would either not be a lunch meeting or should be added
> to the conference agenda itself;
> - flexibility and a degree of spontaneity are necessary.
>
> So, one suggestion for a Wikimania Wiki Women's lunch meeting (and I am sure
> there are other possibilities that will be considered between now and the
> next conference) is to print up multiple copies of some theme labels for
> people to grab and put on their table as they go into the lunch room. For
> example, there could be labels for tables for women who want to:
> -  meet new people/conference participants;
> - talk about the conference sessions;
> - NOT talk about the conference sessions;
> - continue an unfinished earlier discussion;
> - plan some women's meetings to be held during pre-allocated times during
> the conference (eg the women's edit-a-thon suggested above).
> There are many more possible but you get the drift.
>
> If multiple rooms are available the same procedure could be applied in
> advance and rooms allocated for lots of smaller lunch groups. That sort of
> thing depends on the venue but breaking it up means missing the opportunity
> for a gathering of everyone together. Also, requiring a forced choice for
> women who have a range of interests and commitments is something to avoid.
>
> Whiteghost.ink
>
>
> On 26 July 2012 07:01, Orsolya Gyenes <gyenes.orsolya@wiki.media.hu> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, we really didn't expect over 120 women (double as much as last year)
>> and I think it was right to get to know each other and learn where we all
>> coming from and what we are interested in. Usually that doesn't happen on
>> this list.
>>
>> Maybe we could organize a female edithaton during the Hacking Days in HK,
>> if there's a need for it.
>>
>> ~Orsolya
>> Deputy Program Chair
>>
>>
>> 2012/7/25 Carol Moore DC <carolmooredc@verizon.net>
>>>
>>> From
>>> http://wikimania2012.wikimedia.org/wiki/Feedback#Other_meetups_and_meetings
>>>
>>>  The Women's Luncheon on Saturday was something I was very much looking
>>> forward to, but it fell short of my expectations. I was enjoying bonding
>>> with the women at my table, asking the speakers about their presentations
>>> and hoping to form some more solid relationships with veteran and new
>>> Wikipedians alike. Being required to sit back quietly while 125+ women each
>>> stood up to introduce themselves felt like a waste of an opportunity to
>>> build a stronger female editing community. Knowing that the women are
>>> passionate about sharing was good, but wouldn't have been more to the
>>> purpose to encourage networking so all the women in attendance would be more
>>> inclined to stay active and recruit knowing there was a pool of support they
>>> could personally draw upon?  [[User:Samarista|Samarista]] ([[User
>>> talk:Samarista|talk]]) 17 July 2012 (UTC)
>>>
>>> I personally liked the intros.  Perhaps suggest a common topic or two
>>> people can discuss at tables?
>>>
>>> Or have a separate meetups - a couple at different times, perhaps with
>>> different themes. That might answer her concerns ?
>>>
>>> Note that in the feedback section two of us mentioned that annoucements
>>> of meetups needed to be better.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>



--
Increasing the participation of women in open technology and culture
http://adainitiative.org

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap