On 5 October 2015 at 02:51, James Forrester <james(a)jdforrester.org> wrote:
On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 at 11:25 Joseph Fox
On 4 October 2015 at 19:10, James Forrester
At the Committee’s meeting in Mexico City in
August, we agreed to alter
the way that Wikimania locations are decided.
I don't mean to slight yourself, James, or the committee, but this seems
an unnecessary delay. Why is this only now being communicated?
A fair question. We spent too long discussing options rather than
presenting this earlier. I'm sorry. I have discussed this change with a
variety of people since at least 2007, and others were talking about it
before me, but as the complexity of Wikimania rises each year it has become
more chronic. As Chair of the Committee, the delay is my fault, and I
Would it not have been wise to reveal this as it
was agreed upon rather
than now, after at least two bidding parties have put time and effort into
their bids for 2017?
I might equally ask why people not associated with running Wikimania
decided the create and keep updating mistaken pages on meta about Wikimania
2017 being open for bids without even a post to this list, let alone the
Committee, where we could have pointed out it was false before people spent
time ill-advisedly. :-(
I followed the process because that is what was publish, it was the
process that the community had developed over the last ten years and there
was no indication that the community process had been usurped....
People on the committee had been through the very same process, you as
Chair of this committee have been involved in the process for a long time
and knew that people would be preparing to follow the Meta process well
before the dates. You as chair lead the changes you as chair were
responsible to ensure those changes were communicate and any processes
already published you updated in a timely manor to ensure people knew about
oh and those pages suggested people join this list there was never an
instruction to contact the committee and seek their permission to bid as
the bid selction was to be done by a jury after a period of open public
The large majority of our community members are based in either North
or Europe; organising Wikimanias in these areas allows the majority
of our community members to attend cheaply, so that money spent on
scholarships can go further, and be more focussed in supporting our
community members wherever they are based.
This is true and cannot be ignored. But why, then, is "Europe" such a
narrow definition? Why no provision for Eastern Europe and Russia? This
seems quite disappointing given we have active affiliates in these areas.
The groupings are based on where the majority of Wikimedians are. They can
of course change over time. I was hoping to work with fellow Wikimedians to
narrow down these definitions so that it's clear for instance which group
each interested community group falls.