Hi Florence,
I can bring my experience in organizing Wiki Loves Monuments and Wiki
Loves Earth in Switzerland and recently being member of the
international team.
The big constraint of WLX is the timeframe. In one month the local teams
have to send the list of winners and in few months the international
jury to select the winners.
Last year in Switzerland we have received the same comments about
transparency, I agree with them but it's difficult to find a good
balance between time and transparency.
As member of the international jury we gave also a list of potential
jury tools to be used but at the moment WLX jury tool is the more
flexible even if not the most complete.
Within IEG program there was a discussion about the financial support to
improve the old jury tool used by WLM
(
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Modernize_the_Wiki_Loves_Monumen…),
but this option has been excluded because Narvaez sent the information
to discontinue the development of the old jury tool, at the moment the
tool of Ilya is a good option and the international team of WLM asked to
use it also for this contest.
At the moment I think that it makes sense to support better the WLX jury
tool, but I have to add that the technology used by Ilya is not simple
(it uses Scala, for instance, and this is a new language with small
group of developers).
Kind regards
On 14.03.2016 12:14, Florence Devouard wrote:
Hello guys
I wanted to give you a first feedback regarding the organization of
WLA and in particular the organization of the jury and of the global
vote.
The reason why I offer this feedback now is because I read in the
local teams feedback that the votes should be more transparent.
I could not agree more...
--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch