Global North/Global South is an unrealistic fallacy creates a poor
subdivision of resources it'd be better to see support for emerging and
isolated communities, given that including 2017 this will be the 4th
consecutive Wikimania in North America or Europe
Yes the question could have been better framed, but the question remains as
to how what is put in an application is validated especially when it comes
to community work and impact, where there is a local active community are
questions being asked. For those that have previously received and
reported after being a recipient what validation processes are there, which
does leave people wondering how someone who is very active isnt getting
through the process while others are. TPS value is in the sharing of
experiences both while there and with the local community afterwards if
that isnt happening then the TPS is just a free holiday. I've also seen
lots of events with apparent zero or near zero return as well.
Dislosure -
- I attended Wikimania in 2012 in Washington on a scholarship, learnt
about QRpedia and started two QR projects here afterwards
- I attended Wikimania in 2014 in London funded by the WMAU, where I did
the WMUK training course and spent wikimania sharing the QRpedia experience
at the village booth.
- I was invited by the WMF to Mexico in 2015, declined because I had
committed to working with University students establishing the first
Indigenous Australian language Wikipedia
On 22 May 2017 at 06:34, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sorry, Pine....but no. It's naming and
shaming. If Praveen had
wanted to highlight the frequency of Wikimedians being granted Wikimania
scholarsips, they could have done exactly what Mike Peel did - compare the
relevant lists and highlight the frequency of users receiving one, two or
three grants over the four years for which data is available. That would
have been - and is - a reasonable point of discussion. It turns out that
Praveen's information was incomplete at best, and incorrect at worst.
It is unfortunate that people have to say "don't trash someone else
because they got something you didn't". But that's really what it comes
down to. There are a lot of valid discussion points about Wikimania TPS
grants. That one specific individual has received more than one of them,
and someone is implying that the grantee failed to live up to their
undertaken responsibilities, is not a reasonable way of discussing those
points.
I'm going to be honest - aside from the issue of multiple grant awards,
I'm finding that this year's processes are a bit more clear than in
previous years. The partial grants, which are worth around 850 USD
depending on room rates, are a good idea, and allow the recipients to
select the most suitable means of transportation for them - especially now
that so many more people are avoiding travel through certain geographic
locations.[1]
It might be possible, given the number of applicants involved, to provide
a bit more statistical information; for example, total applicants, number
who passed Phase 1, number who passed Phase 2 and were ranked, percentage
of total applicants who received a full or partial grant, etc. It *might*
be possible to provide the general information about Global South/Global
North applicant ratio, but there might be a risk of de-anonymising
[unsuccessful] applicants when trying to identify number of applications
and scholarships from each size wiki community. I think the WMF could
probably also identify number of people who were awarded grants but could
not accept them.
Risker/Anne
[1] Disclosure - I received a set-dollar partial grant in 2013 - Hong Kong
- which was supposed to pay for my airfare. However, it took so long to
confirm the grant that the airfares had doubled from the time they had been
calculated five months before.I'm still glad I went.
On 21 May 2017 at 17:09, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Perhaps I have overlooked something, but it seems
to me that what has
been offered is a specific example, which I would distinguish from "being
named and shamed" in the sense that the example is used to illustrate a
potential problem -- in this case with the system rather than with an
individual, although it's not exactly harassment to report potential
misconduct if there was public evidence of such. Let's remember that
transparency is something that we value, and keep calm and civil while
discussing the situation.
Pine
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l