On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 12:21 AM, <wikimania-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Sure. I'm totally not going to try to rail-road this discussion (or
maybe it should be on-wiki?) by announcing a Jury when we're not sure
how we'll proceed. :-)

James D. Forrester
jdforrester@wikimedia.org | jdforrester@gmail.com
[[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]

There were some useful responses to James' initial message, but I think the end result (through nobody's intention) was to get us off track from selecting a jury for 2013. There are a number of groups working on bids [1]; I think it would be a good thing to get a jury announced so they (we? [2]) can begin laying out the process and guiding toward a decision.

This is not intended to dismiss the important "meta issue" about how locations are selected. I agree with what has been said, that it is too late to impose some sort of rotation system for the 2013 process; but I do think it's an idea well worth some deeper consideration. I think that having an active jury would be beneficial to arriving at a well-considered decision on that, so I really don't see a conflict here.

I'm hoping to hear from some other folks here: should we encourage James F. to resume his planned course, and select/announce a jury ASAP, without prejudice toward the question of whether a rotation system is implemented after 2013?

Jan-Bart? Perhaps a plate of stroopwafels will help move the discussion forward?


[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2013_bids
[2] I have thrown my name in the ring and would like to have a decision soon, since it will affect how I spend my next few months.