Though I’m not sure if it’d be right to take names here, but this is probably an opportunity to discuss about:
- if there is a need for consensus when a Wikimedia affiliate provides support to one person from another affiliate
- if an affiliate provides support if they share it on wiki for transparency or not
- Wikimania scholarship recipients generally create Learning Patterns and write reports. These are good practices in general but making it mandatory for the scholarship recipients brings out a really valuable pool of knowledge which otherwise might not be the case because of the post-Wikimania fatigue. There is a need for more clarity if non-Wikimania participants (individual/affiliate reps) who travel because of support from another affiliate should also produce the same
- If an affiliate decides to provide support, should they announce publicly (on regional mailman lists and meta/village pumps) if there is any conflict. If there was a rationale that the former used to identify certain individuals, should they share that as well?
I think discussing these above would be useful in general.
Bodhi, didn’t want to steal your thunder but I think some of the general points (above) can be discussed which in someway would be useful for all such future supports.
Subhashish
Begin forwarded message:
Hi,
WMIN chapter president Rahul Deshmukh attended Wikimania 2018 in Cape Town without being selected for any type of scholarship. My question is why was he sent to the conference depriving other community members from India who were in the waiting list.
He spoke in the informal chairpersons' meetup for few minutes. The meeting doesn't require president of the organization's presence, and already there were 2 EC member of WMIN present, who could have attended the meeting.
To me, this is utter misuse of power and abuse of donation money.
Thanks,
Bodhisattwa