On 7 June 2014 13:27, Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 07/06/2014, Pharos
<pharosofalexandria(a)gmail.com> wrote:
...
This was an entirely volunteer-run conference.
Thanks Pharos. My question was about proportions of attendees being
women or employees, rather than who organized it. I should have
avoided the subsequent comment, as that appears to have taken us on a
tangent (by the way, I think paying someone to help project manage
conferences is an excellent use of donated funds, it is the sort of
thing that is likely to cause volunteer stress and burn-out).
Aude's email (Sat Jun 7 16:12:35 UTC 2014) has confirmed that at least
one attendee was an employee, so the answer to that question cannot be
zero.
Hold on....so now you are saying that someone employed by a WMF chapter or
the WMF itself will never be allowed to be considered anything other than
an employee? Fae, if they're paying their own way, they are there as
volunteers, not employees. If they have not been directed to attend by
their employer, they are volunteers. Not everyone does everything for
work-related purposes, and a very significant proportion of Wikimedians who
work for a chapter or the WMF also make volunteer contributions in many
ways to WMF projects. This is a good thing, and shouldn't result in them
being slammed for attending Wikimedia-related events on their own time
spending their own money, as the nature of the question implies. If they
didn't register as "employee of Chapter xx" or "employee of WMF",
and their
employer hasn't paid for their registration, there is absolutely no reason
for them to be considered "employees" during their attendance.
I do not believe that gender is a mandatory question on any registrations
for any WMF projects, and I question whether or not it's an appropriate one
unless there is some specific reason to ask (e.g., accommodation
arrangements). Therefore, there is no accurate method to assess the number
of women who attended.
Risker/Anne