Hello again Maysara<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Maysara Omar <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:maysara.omar@gmail.com" target="_blank">maysara.omar@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr"><div>Of course i am aware that the decision has already been made. [...] whatever jury took that decision has fallen into a manifest error</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m not sure what a &quot;manifest error&quot; is. However, the Jury is made up of smart people, and I&#39;ve assisted on a few bids for Wikimania. They</div>

<div>ask tough questions. Competitive cities and ordinary Wikimedians are also invited to ask questions while the bidding is going on. This is</div><div>an open and honest process, and it was during that time that questions should have been brought up. Did you ask these questions at</div>

<div>that time?</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>2) If even presidential elections can be repeated because their results were doubtful, i cannot see why everyone here so far is talking about the &quot;impossibility&quot; of reconsidering the validity of the decision made by the jury, as though it is a sanctified or infallible one!</div>

</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Some presidential elections are repeated/questioned because of irregularities in the voting process. Unless you are questioning the integrity of the jury&#39;s selection process, (which I don&#39;t believe you are), then your analogy doesn&#39;t hold. The Jury made a decision, and you don&#39;t agree with it. That doesn&#39;t mean</div>

<div>it should be subject to review.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Finally, Wikimania conferences must be accessible to everyone, without having to speak of making &quot;exceptions&quot; and taking extra measures to smoothen the passage of those who participate together everyday in creating and making the new free knowledge and culture of our age and the future. This is the position that I have chosen for myself, rather than the one that you ask me to adopt, that is, to suggest solutions to numberless problems and to an erroneous and unfair condition and situation. And now I ask you, what is YOUR position? </div>

</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>My position is that while life should be fair, it is often not. While world peace and human harmony are laudable goals that I fully support, we have to live with the realities of today. Any place that the Jury picks will make it difficult or preclude some from attending Wikimania. Sometimes these considerations are geographical, sometimes they will be political, and no matter what they are, they aren&#39;t going to be fair for some.</div>
<div>So, in the framework of this imperfect world, we should realize that we can&#39;t accommodate everyone. And we shouldn&#39;t second guess the Wikimania Jury who spent time going through all of the various bids and questioning many organizing teams and coming to a difficult decision.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Now, you can spend a bunch of effort trying to revisit the Jury&#39;s decision, or you can expend that same effort trying to assist the current organizing team in helping to accommodate as many people as they can. Or you can even try to revise the selection criteria for future years. I&#39;d think that the best use of effort would be in assisting others, but it is both your time and prerogative to do with as you see fit.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Gerald</div>
</div>