All of those qualifiers are nice, but the fact that it made it onto a draft at all is the
issue. This was something that never should have made it that far. Lots of things get
killed off in committee and never make it on paper. I'd be one thing if this was a
transcript of the minutes, and it mentioned that it was brought up and promptly shelved.
It's another thing entirely to have it get as far as a working document.
Wikipedia discussion boards regularly shoot down dangerous and stupid ideas before they
make it very far. That's a good thing, it means that the project's defensive
filters are working.
The idea of spending 40K or even 10K on a bid is a dangerous and stupid idea, and my
respect for WMUK took a hit because you all let it get way too far. Kill it now.
Oh, and if you're pissed that people from other chapters are tearing WMUK a new one
over this (i.e. meddling in your chapter's affairs), that should a) be an indication
of how awful the idea being discussed is, and b) has a lot to do with that this discussion
is taking place on Wikimania-l, a list subscribed to by large swaths of the movement,
including those outside the UK. Don't want criticism? Keep it internal.
Sven
On Aug 26, 2012, at 8:37 AM, HJ Mitchell <hjmitchell(a)ymail.com> wrote:
Right, let me be quite blunt. This thread is not
"undiplomatic", it's an attempt to meddle in the affairs of other chapters,
which do not concern you. how would you have liked it if I was trashing the Haifa or DC
bids before they were even anything as formal as bids?
As to "my opinion of WMUK has been tainted", let me again be very blunt. You
have clearly not read the documents linked, or not understood what you were looking at.
You are looking at suggestions. We are exploring a variety of options, none of which have
been discussed or approved. Now, as WSC says, last year's bid failed partly because of
insufficient support from the chapter, so this year, there is a *suggestion* in a *draft*
budget to *earmark* *up to* £40k for the bid. That doesn't mean that £40k *will* be
allocated, nor that, if it is allocated, the whole £40k will be spent. In fact, I think
it's very unlikely we will find anything to spend that kind of money on in just the
bidding stage, but that's why it's called a *draft*. You can't criticise the
chapter for offering financial support when it was criticised last year for not providing
financial support.
Now kindly keep your noses out of other people's business.
(I should probably point out that I'm not speaking on behalf of WMUK)
Thank you,
Harry Mitchell
http://enwp.org/User:HJ
Phone: 024 7698 0977
Skype: harry_j_mitchell
From: WereSpielChequers <werespielchequers(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimania general list (open subscription) <wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sunday, 26 August 2012, 12:34
Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] UK budget plan for 2014 Wikimania bid
I agree that it would be wrong for chapter money to go into Wikimania bids, especially as
some bid teams have access to resources that others don't. However London lost the
last bid against Hong Kong partly because it was deemed not to have "solid support
from the chapter". Considering how much support there was from the chapter it would
be difficult to see how the UK chapter could give more solid support without supplying
paid staff time. So the logical response to the jury's decision
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2012-May/003491.html is to budget for
more solid support from the chapter.
If the Jury had said that both bids were very good , but for 2013 it was really time for
another Wikimania in the Far East then we'd be in a different situation.
WSC
On 25 August 2012 20:32, James Hare <messedrocker(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Staffing is a very good thing to spend money on—while executing the conference. Spending
$62,000 on staff for a bid would be worth the investment if bidding for Wikimania were
anything like bidding for the Olympics, but it is not. The spirit of Wikimania is
ultimately from its volunteer leadership, and if the Wikimedia UK volunteers cannot muster
that spirit to run their own bid, they have no hope and no soul.
James
On Aug 25, 2012, at 3:28 PM, Itzik Edri wrote:
Sorry, it's undiplomatic to interfere with
others budget plans - but I just can't ignore how the future of Wikimania will look
like if others will follow UK plans to invest £40,000 only for the bid process (about
62,000$).
I wrote my last response on that few minutes ago:
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:2013_Activity_Plan#5.2_Wikiconference_2013
"Hire a production company for half of this cost. It's really waste of donors
money, for what we expect to be done by volunteers, or for a minimum costs. If every one
who going to bid for Wikimania will spent this amount of money (and why them not? if UK
can, why others not?), it's mean that for 4 places every year we are
"spending" more than 260,000$ only for the bid!!!. --217.132.1.140 19:22, 25
August 2012 (UTC)"
I really think the "Wikimania" groups need to speak about that. It's the
first time a group/chapter spending such amount of money for bid, and it's open a door
for next cities to do the same - with money which can uses to invest in Wikimania itself.
Itzik
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l