Thanks for that comment, Dariusz; Wikimania London took over two years of preparation, and occupied me full time for six months in the run up to the event. It's a massive undertaking, and in retrospect it seems deeply unfair to expect volunteers to do this. There was a bidding process, so there was heavy pressure to minimise/understate the budget - which mostly comes at the cost of the volunteers. I think the community just has to be more realistic about what it costs to put on a 1000+ person event. Were I to do it again I would absolutely include subsistence for the organising team in the budget. It needs professional commitment and professional skills, even with WMF staff support. I do think that the movement deserves an annual event, and particularly that the WMF should capitalise on it more from a comms perspective. Wiki*edia is a significant entity and we should be presenting ourselves as such. *Edward Saperia* Conference Director Wikimania London <http://www.wikimanialondon.org> email &lt;edsaperia(a)gmail.com&gt; • facebook <http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia> • twitter <http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia> • 07796955572 133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG > In the same time, I've seen the following problems over the years, not > directly linked to the financial cost (which in the face of our relative > financial stability can be justified by the benefits, depending on how we > define them): > - huge WMF staff involvement (most Wikimanias run smoothly also thanks > to countless hours put in by the staff), > - huge volunteer local organizers involvement (in fact, my observation > is that many chapters organizing WIkimanias suffer from a motivation crisis > afterward). > > [...] > > While we can get the money (at least for now), the human involvement > cost is something I would not dare to dismiss just by emphasizing the > benefits of Wikimania for the movement. > > [...] > > Instead of discussing whether we should have a Wikimania every year or > not, perhaps we should try to list and discuss the reasons why it is such a > big strain? If it is clear that we can't afford it every year (because of > the human cost, probably more importantly than the finances), the decision > to break with the annual format will be a natural consequence of such an > analysis. > > [...] > > Dariusz Jemielniak ("pundit", a current Trustee). > _______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

I agree with Ed here. Organising a conference of this size is a huge undertaking to ask of volunteers. I wouldn't want to see Wikimania go down the road of being organised by a team of professional conference organisers because then it would lose the organic community feel that makes it so special, but we shouldn't rule out stipends for the local team. Otherwise we end up with the slightly odd situation of the WMF or local chapter bringing in paid staff to fill gaps left by volunteers but the volunteers still effectively working full-time unpaid. I had a much smaller role in 2014 than Ed and others and was fortunate to be in a position to dedicate a lot of time to it; I certainly wouldn't be in a position now to devote as much time as I did for free and without wishing to speak for Ed, I doubt he would be either even if he was willing. If that's a problem in major developed economies, I'd imagine it would be even more of a problem in places where people have less disposable income. Harry Mitchell http://enwp.org/User:HJ +44 (0) 7507 536 971 Skype: harry_j_mitchell On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Edward Saperia &lt;edsaperia(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > Thanks for that comment, Dariusz; > > Wikimania London took over two years of preparation, and occupied me > full time for six months in the run up to the event. It's a massive > undertaking, and in retrospect it seems deeply unfair to expect volunteers > to do this. > > There was a bidding process, so there was heavy pressure to > minimise/understate the budget - which mostly comes at the cost of the > volunteers. I think the community just has to be more realistic about what > it costs to put on a 1000+ person event. > > Were I to do it again I would absolutely include subsistence for the > organising team in the budget. It needs professional commitment and > professional skills, even with WMF staff support. > > I do think that the movement deserves an annual event, and > particularly that the WMF should capitalise on it more from a comms > perspective. Wiki*edia is a significant entity and we should be presenting > ourselves as such. > > *Edward Saperia* > Conference Director Wikimania London <http://www.wikimanialondon.org/> > email &lt;edsaperia(a)gmail.com&gt; • facebook > <http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia> • twitter > <http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia> • 07796955572 > 133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG > > >> In the same time, I've seen the following problems over the years, >> not directly linked to the financial cost (which in the face of our >> relative financial stability can be justified by the benefits, depending on >> how we define them): >> - huge WMF staff involvement (most Wikimanias run smoothly also >> thanks to countless hours put in by the staff), >> - huge volunteer local organizers involvement (in fact, my >> observation is that many chapters organizing WIkimanias suffer from a >> motivation crisis afterward). >> >> [...] >> >> While we can get the money (at least for now), the human involvement >> cost is something I would not dare to dismiss just by emphasizing the >> benefits of Wikimania for the movement. >> >> [...] >> >> Instead of discussing whether we should have a Wikimania every year >> or not, perhaps we should try to list and discuss the reasons why it is >> such a big strain? If it is clear that we can't afford it every year >> (because of the human cost, probably more importantly than the finances), >> the decision to break with the annual format will be a natural consequence >> of such an analysis. >> >> [...] >> >> Dariusz Jemielniak ("pundit", a current Trustee). >> > > > _______________________________________________ > 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

Hi all, I don't want to take away from the huge amount of work and movement contributions that were made by the Mexico, London, and other Wikimania teams, but: it's worth noting that we could organise a Wikimania with the same number of attendees for a lot less amount of volunteer time (and also money). ~1,000+ people conferences take place quite often each year, across many different academic, non-profic and commercial communities, and there are dedicated conference venues that will just sort out everything - the venue, the internet access, hotel options, the whole lot. They are often located near to international airports, or major cities, which are easy to get to from across the globe. If we wanted to, we could go as far as saying "we're meeting at this venue, delegate fees are X per day, here is the list of nearby hotels that you can stay at, it's up to you to sort out everything else yourself" - and that would lead to a very cheap Wikimania for the WMF and the local Wikimedia organisation. Rather than going for those options, we've preferred to keep things complicated - we chose not to use standard conference packages, instead picking specific locations and approaches for each Wikimania. We travel to out of the way locations. We bolt on different bespoke activities (such as evening events, and outreach activities) to those conferences that increase the complexity of the event. We ask volunteers to take on duties that we could ask attendees to take on instead (photographs/organising sessions, etc.). We vary the structure of each conference to include the preferences of each organising committee. We organise a scholarship process. If we're going to do a rational cost-benefit analysis of Wikimania, including all of the options about regularity, intentions, etc., then perhaps we should also consider the basics - what's the minimum amount that's needed to hold such an event, leaving aside the optional extras? What can we keep constant between each Wikimania: can we keep the program organisation, the approach to evening events, and the add-on events the same each year (saving volunteer and staff time)? Or perhaps we should acknowledge the extra work that goes into each bespoke Wikimania, and celebrate that? Or seek an intermediate solution - sort out the venue, program, etc., and leave hotel/food options up to attendees? Or perhaps each Wikimania should keep vying for the title of the best Wikimania ever? Thanks, Mike On 10 Jul 2016, at 23:42, Ivan Martínez &lt;galaver(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: It's a lot of work, last week before Wikimania Mexico the coordination team slept less than 4 hours each day. But for me being honest was not a shaming time, was great. And we can have people intended to keep Wikimania annual and run similar challenges. Harry, we had here 72 committed volunteers working without paid and we are not a major developed economy. Darius, I think that "motivations criris afterward" must also be considered in the planning and prior call for Wikimanía volunteers and can be avoided. In Mexico we always tell to people that we did not want them just for giving the best of themselves for three days around, but we wanted to keep them with Wikimedia mission. A month ago we broke a Guinness record and 60% of attendees were Wikimania volunteers. It is a matter of long preplanning, I think. 2016-07-10 15:03 GMT-05:00 Harry Mitchell &lt;hjmwiki(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: > Yes, London was big, and the two Wikimaniae since have been on a > smaller scale, but I'm not sure a ~1,000-person conference is significantly > less of a headache than a ~2,000-person conference, and actually I'd wager > that Esino was more logistically complicated due to the location - for > example having to arrange buses to Varenna and the airports (which were > around 50 miles away). Not that that should be taken as a criticism of the > Esino team - they did a fantastic job in a beautiful location and I'd love > to have another 'scenic Wikimania'. > > I'll let Ed tell you about what he did. I know I saw him spend a lot > of time dealing with the venue and the programme and discussing finance and > logistics, but I'm sure there are lots of other things. Speaking for > myself: those volunteers in red shirts? That was my contribution. The > volunteers on the helpdesks, running sessions, meeting and greeting, > tweeting, photographing, doing odd jobs and generally making things run > smoothly ... I recruited most of them*, got to know them, trained them, > split them into teams, did a lot of the scheduling (easier said than done - > lots of moving parts!). During the conference, they looked after the > attendees, and I looked after them. And I've never worked with such an > amazing group of people. It was a truly humbling experience, but it was a > lot of work. At one point I was receiving something like 200 emails a day > just relating to Wikimania and was having to set aside time at the start > and end of the day to answer the ones that didn't require an immediate > response. I also devised the scheme of reporting and emergency/contingency > planning for volunteers (thankfully this wasn't necessary, but the death of > a Wikimedian at that year's Wikimedia Conference was painfully fresh in our > memories), and spent a lot of time trying to drum up and channel interest > within the UK Wikimedian community. I'm sure there were other things, but > those roles alone took up a significant amount of time - certainly in > excess of 40 hours a week in the final few weeks before the conference. > > *(Not wishing to take credit from anyone else; I worked closely with > lots of other people on all these things, particularly Hera Hussain, and > Fabian Tompsett and Chris McKenna who were at the time employed by > Wikimedia UK.) > > > Harry Mitchell > http://enwp.org/User:HJ > +44 (0) 7507 536 971 > Skype: harry_j_mitchell > > On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Lodewijk &lt;lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org > > wrote: > >> Thanks Harry, Ed, >> >> Of course London was a bit of an exceptionally big Wikimania - but >> did you evaluate your effort somewhere, and note what you spent your time >> on somewhere? Just to get an impression which components take most effort >> (as Dariusz suggested)? >> >> Best, >> Lodewijk >> >> 2016-07-10 20:25 GMT+02:00 Harry Mitchell &lt;hjmwiki(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: >> >>> I agree with Ed here. Organising a conference of this size is a huge >>> undertaking to ask of volunteers. I wouldn't want to see Wikimania go down >>> the road of being organised by a team of professional conference organisers >>> because then it would lose the organic community feel that makes it so >>> special, but we shouldn't rule out stipends for the local team. Otherwise >>> we end up with the slightly odd situation of the WMF or local chapter >>> bringing in paid staff to fill gaps left by volunteers but the volunteers >>> still effectively working full-time unpaid. I had a much smaller role in >>> 2014 than Ed and others and was fortunate to be in a position to dedicate a >>> lot of time to it; I certainly wouldn't be in a position now to devote as >>> much time as I did for free and without wishing to speak for Ed, I doubt he >>> would be either even if he was willing. >>> >>> If that's a problem in major developed economies, I'd imagine it >>> would be even more of a problem in places where people have less disposable >>> income. >>> >>> Harry Mitchell >>> http://enwp.org/User:HJ >>> +44 (0) 7507 536 971 >>> Skype: harry_j_mitchell >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Edward Saperia &lt;edsaperia(a)gmail.com >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks for that comment, Dariusz; >>>> >>>> Wikimania London took over two years of preparation, and occupied >>>> me full time for six months in the run up to the event. It's a massive >>>> undertaking, and in retrospect it seems deeply unfair to expect volunteers >>>> to do this. >>>> >>>> There was a bidding process, so there was heavy pressure to >>>> minimise/understate the budget - which mostly comes at the cost of the >>>> volunteers. I think the community just has to be more realistic about what >>>> it costs to put on a 1000+ person event. >>>> >>>> Were I to do it again I would absolutely include subsistence for >>>> the organising team in the budget. It needs professional commitment and >>>> professional skills, even with WMF staff support. >>>> >>>> I do think that the movement deserves an annual event, and >>>> particularly that the WMF should capitalise on it more from a comms >>>> perspective. Wiki*edia is a significant entity and we should be presenting >>>> ourselves as such. >>>> >>>> *Edward Saperia* >>>> Conference Director Wikimania London >>>> <http://www.wikimanialondon.org/> >>>> email &lt;edsaperia(a)gmail.com&gt; • facebook >>>> <http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia> • twitter >>>> <http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia> • 07796955572 >>>> 133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG >>>> >>>> >>>>> In the same time, I've seen the following problems over the years, >>>>> not directly linked to the financial cost (which in the face of our >>>>> relative financial stability can be justified by the benefits, depending on >>>>> how we define them): >>>>> - huge WMF staff involvement (most Wikimanias run smoothly also >>>>> thanks to countless hours put in by the staff), >>>>> - huge volunteer local organizers involvement (in fact, my >>>>> observation is that many chapters organizing WIkimanias suffer from a >>>>> motivation crisis afterward). >>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> While we can get the money (at least for now), the human >>>>> involvement cost is something I would not dare to dismiss just by >>>>> emphasizing the benefits of Wikimania for the movement. >>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> Instead of discussing whether we should have a Wikimania every >>>>> year or not, perhaps we should try to list and discuss the reasons why it >>>>> is such a big strain? If it is clear that we can't afford it every year >>>>> (because of the human cost, probably more importantly than the finances), >>>>> the decision to break with the annual format will be a natural consequence >>>>> of such an analysis. >>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> Dariusz Jemielniak ("pundit", a current Trustee). >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 > > -- *Iván Martínez* *Presidente - Wikimedia México A.C.User:ProtoplasmaKid * // Mis comunicaciones respecto a Wikipedia/Wikimedia pueden tener una moratoria en su atención debido a que es un voluntariado. // Ayuda a proteger a Wikipedia, dona ahora: https://donate.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ 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

Well this thread turned out bigger (and much more productive) than I expected!

To my mind, Wikimania continuing to happen every year is a minor miracle, and one that's only possible with the hard work and dedication of lots of people. However, it's a miracle that isn't without its problems. The most obvious problem to my mind is that there is a very mixed quality of actual conference programme, and without clear objectives (or at least not consistent objectives). The Wikimedia Conference, by contrast, has a much clearer alignment of the programme with a set of goals, and work happens to follow up before and after the conference. The second problem is that the responsibilities for governance and management of the conference are really very unclear. We have the Wikimania Committee, we have the local team (and in some cases a local chapter who may or may not be working closely with the bid team), we have the Programme Committee and we have the WMF. (Actually we have the WMF at least twice, as the priorities of the WMF team involved in organising the conference don't always seem to align with those of the rest of the organisation).

In my view, the most useful thing for all these groups to do is to work out who is actually responsible for what, and document it, in public.

Chris _______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Chris On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:26 AM, Ellie Young &lt;eyoung(a)wikimedia.org&gt; wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Chris Keating < > chriskeatingwiki(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > >> Well this thread turned out bigger (and much more productive) than I >> expected! >> > > >> To my mind, Wikimania continuing to happen every year is a minor >> miracle, and one that's only possible with the hard work and >> dedication of >> lots of people. >> >> However, it's a miracle that isn't without its problems. The most >> obvious problem to my mind is that there is a very mixed quality of >> actual >> conference programme, and without clear objectives (or at least not >> consistent objectives). The Wikimedia Conference, by contrast, has a >> much >> clearer alignment of the programme with a set of goals, and work >> happens to >> follow up before and after the conference. >> >> The second problem is that the responsibilities for governance and >> management of the conference are really very unclear. We have the >> Wikimania >> Committee, we have the local team (and in some cases a local chapter >> who >> may or may not be working closely with the bid team), we have the >> Programme >> Committee and we have the WMF. (Actually we have the WMF at least >> twice, as >> the priorities of the WMF team involved in organising the conference >> don't >> always seem to align with those of the rest of the organisation). >> > > > >> >> In my view, the most useful thing for all these groups to do is to >> work out who is actually responsible for what, and document it, in >> public. >> > > T > ​his is an excellent suggestion. It is not unclear to me how things > work having been involved with coordination among the various 'players' > for > the past few years. The Handbook is out of date as well. So I will > take > an action item to start revising this and making it clearer to > everyone > about the structure, organization, etc for the community at large. > This > is especially necessary as we move forward with next steps for 2018 in > the > coming months (working on this with WMF and Committee so we are all in > alignment about the future, and we can better enable prospective > future > hosts/organizers to engage with us.) > > > > > >> >> Chris >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimania-l mailing list >> Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >> >> > > > -- > Ellie Young > Events Manager > Wikimedia Foundation > eyoung(a)wikimedia.org > c. 510 701 8649 > > _______________________________________________ > 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