Nobody ever said that the Catalyst was a total failure. It had indeed good points. The thing is that I am not the only one with the opinion that the results were clearly not good enough for what was expected from all money invested and it is quite not fair to compare them with a volunteer effort with obviously less resources. Catalyst was cited 3 times in all report, and its members were always kind and helpful on relating with User Group. Sometimes they were just the contact and other times they were crucial for the work, but there were also other moments in which they had absolutely nothing to do with what was done by User Group members. It actually just doesn't serve as a good measure, nor comparison to evaluate Catalyst Program. Regards. 2015-02-25 23:31 GMT-03:00 Rodrigo Padula &lt;rodrigopadula(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: descriptive to in https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Brasil/Repor… -- *Lucas Teles* *Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia.*https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles Contact me: [image: Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/telesr> < https://www.facebook.com/telesr <http://www.facebook.com/telesr> > [image: Twitter] <http://www.twitter.com/Lucas_Teles> < https://twitter.com/Lucas_Teles > [image: Skype] < lucastelesr > Mobile: < 55 71 9374 2725 > I am a Wikimedia volunteer. Wikimedia Foundation can not be held responsible for my actions. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>