TL;DR: Fill https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1RtBz72MTmKJKcraZk8FORHZRL6Y0gSo5VeNIFOKwHtw... , it takes 5 min.
--
As you probably know by now, Wikimania 2016 Esino Lario wants to achieve a Wikimania format which allows people to "get things done" and leave the conference fully satisfied with the result of their investment of time and other resources (see pillars 2 and 4: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario/Pillars ). For this purpose, we consider all audiences (see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario/Program#Targ... ).
Participants other than scholarship recipients and reimbursed representatives are one group we heard very little from, but we think they are important because: 1) they have financial resources and help make the Wikimania budget sustainable; 2) they have motivation to share and ideas on what makes Wikimania valuable.
We set up this form mainly to collect names of some such people and talk with them later: if you provide your contact, we may write you on this topic. We may release aggregate data from the resposes; data will be handled by us and the Wikimania 2016 fiscal sponsor "Ecomuseo delle Grigne" (under EU law). Please fill the whole form, it's short!
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1RtBz72MTmKJKcraZk8FORHZRL6Y0gSo5VeNIFOKwHtw...
Feel free to forward this invite to anyone.
Thanks, Federico Leva and Martin Rulsch Wikimania 2016 team, scholarships subteam
Hi Nemo,
I found the last question a bit confusing, as it talks about "how much more...", but it isnt clear what 'more' is relative to. More than the 'actual cost to the organisation'? Or, if the survey participant self-funded their Wikimania, how much more should they spend to attend Wikimania? So I put '0'. ;-)
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
TL;DR: Fill https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1RtBz72MTmKJKcraZk8FORHZRL6Y0gSo5VeNIFOKwHtw... , it takes 5 min.
--
As you probably know by now, Wikimania 2016 Esino Lario wants to achieve a Wikimania format which allows people to "get things done" and leave the conference fully satisfied with the result of their investment of time and other resources (see pillars 2 and 4: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario/Pillars ). For this purpose, we consider all audiences (see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario/Program#Targ... ).
Participants other than scholarship recipients and reimbursed representatives are one group we heard very little from, but we think they are important because: 1) they have financial resources and help make the Wikimania budget sustainable; 2) they have motivation to share and ideas on what makes Wikimania valuable.
We set up this form mainly to collect names of some such people and talk with them later: if you provide your contact, we may write you on this topic. We may release aggregate data from the resposes; data will be handled by us and the Wikimania 2016 fiscal sponsor "Ecomuseo delle Grigne" (under EU law). Please fill the whole form, it's short!
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1RtBz72MTmKJKcraZk8FORHZRL6Y0gSo5VeNIFOKwHtw...
Feel free to forward this invite to anyone.
Thanks, Federico Leva and Martin Rulsch Wikimania 2016 team, scholarships subteam
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
John Mark Vandenberg, 11/09/2015 11:51:
I found the last question a bit confusing, as it talks about "how much more...", but it isnt clear what 'more' is relative to. More than the 'actual cost to the organisation'? Or, if the survey participant self-funded their Wikimania, how much more should they spend to attend Wikimania? So I put '0'.
Thanks for going through the questions. You are right, that question is ambiguous; but it's intentionally so, to avoid forcing a single interpretation of where the "more" starts. (I have my opinions, but there is no rule; and past Wikimanias were very different.)
We'll see how well it works; this is just the beginning of a conversation. :)
Nemo
I think it might have been useful to ask questions about what might make people not attend a Wikimania (e.g., location, dollars, not interested in programming, poor cost to potential benefit ratio).
Risker/Anne
On 11 September 2015 at 10:35, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
John Mark Vandenberg, 11/09/2015 11:51:
I found the last question a bit confusing, as it talks about "how much more...", but it isnt clear what 'more' is relative to. More than the 'actual cost to the organisation'? Or, if the survey participant self-funded their Wikimania, how much more should they spend to attend Wikimania? So I put '0'.
Thanks for going through the questions. You are right, that question is ambiguous; but it's intentionally so, to avoid forcing a single interpretation of where the "more" starts. (I have my opinions, but there is no rule; and past Wikimanias were very different.)
We'll see how well it works; this is just the beginning of a conversation. :)
Nemo
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Participants other than scholarship recipients and reimbursed representatives are one group we heard very little from, but we think they are important because: 1) they have financial resources and help make the Wikimania budget sustainable; 2) they have motivation to share and ideas on what makes Wikimania valuable.
I agree. People attending on their own expense are really important, especially for next year. It will be easier/cheaper for communities in Europe and MENA regions which are of the most active communities on Wikipedia. I think the number of attendees would be bigger next year.
Thanks for creating this survey, Nemo!
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I think it might have been useful to ask questions about what might make people not attend a Wikimania (e.g., location, dollars, not interested in programming, poor cost to potential benefit ratio).
Risker/Anne
On 11 September 2015 at 10:35, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
John Mark Vandenberg, 11/09/2015 11:51:
I found the last question a bit confusing, as it talks about "how much more...", but it isnt clear what 'more' is relative to. More than the 'actual cost to the organisation'? Or, if the survey participant self-funded their Wikimania, how much more should they spend to attend Wikimania? So I put '0'.
Thanks for going through the questions. You are right, that question is ambiguous; but it's intentionally so, to avoid forcing a single interpretation of where the "more" starts. (I have my opinions, but there is no rule; and past Wikimanias were very different.)
We'll see how well it works; this is just the beginning of a conversation. :)
Nemo
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
well, this ambiguous question forced me to skip it :P More than what? More than the answer to the previous question? Can that be negative? More than what I answered before, what I was prepared to pay? More than what the scholarship will offer? I really think the answers to this question have become pointless this way - a pity!
(and seriously, you post on the talkpage? that's creepy too!)
Lodewijk
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
John Mark Vandenberg, 11/09/2015 11:51:
I found the last question a bit confusing, as it talks about "how much more...", but it isnt clear what 'more' is relative to. More than the 'actual cost to the organisation'? Or, if the survey participant self-funded their Wikimania, how much more should they spend to attend Wikimania? So I put '0'.
Thanks for going through the questions. You are right, that question is ambiguous; but it's intentionally so, to avoid forcing a single interpretation of where the "more" starts. (I have my opinions, but there is no rule; and past Wikimanias were very different.)
We'll see how well it works; this is just the beginning of a conversation. :)
Nemo
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Thank you again to the 50 (!) people who responded. A first followup after a meeting with Iolanda yesterday. There will be more later I think, e.g. this month there is a meetup to talk about program.* The registration form will definitely include an option to donate some money for the scholarships fund. There was a substantial interest in this option. We plan to provide partial scholarships/discount codes of 300 € each, see also https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania/Scholarships/2016 for current budget info and of course https://wikimania2016.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarship_committee . As for the question on (variable) costs, the answers varied a lot. The registration form is also expected to clear up any confusion, because every single service/offering will be labeled with its actual cost. Any unexpected saving will also go back to (future) Wikimania scholarships funds or similar.
The registration form will definitely include an option to donatesome money for the scholarships fund. There was a substantial interest in this option.
Good idea! It might also be a good move to make this kind of donation possible for people who don't register.
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:
The registration form will definitely include an option to donatesome money for the scholarships fund. There was a substantial interest in this option.
Good idea! It might also be a good move to make this kind of donation possible for people who don't register.
uuh - i am not sure if one should open that can of worms. what is the purpose of wikimania? is it to raise money? for sure not. there are more intelligent ways to do that. is wikimania a business, i.e. the organizer want to get as much money out of the conference as possible? for sure not. there are other conference topics which are more promising. imo we should clearly focus everything we do towards the core mission. if wikimania is not serving this mission, than we probably do not need wikimania. if we need more money for wikimania, use the established banner. if we want to have topic bound donations, then use the banner and let the user choose the topic important to her.
personally i do not think "financial diversity" will do any good to the reputation of the wikimedia movement. the wikipedia website is one of the most prominent in the world. i am perceiving a site banner to donate money ok. all other means to raise money i find unacceptable and damaging the reputation. because we are perceived as "competitor" - and this is not what we want to be. imo we should really strive to have clear and consistent picture to the outside world which is not "consistently begging for money on every possibility we see". we want to be enabler so more persons find ways to support our goals.
i am aware as WMUK needs to go begging for money at WMF is automatically triggering such ideas. and i probably would have similar ideas in case i would be WMUK. the solution is to fix the money flow. the income needs to come to an organisation as close to the donor as possible so a donor can walk over and slap the receiver in case of inefficiency.
just my 2c, rupert
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:44 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:
The registration form will definitely include an option todonate
some money for the scholarships fund. There was a substantial interest
in
this option.
Good idea! It might also be a good move to make this kind of donation possible for people who don't register.
uuh - i am not sure if one should open that can of worms. what is the purpose of wikimania? is it to raise money? for sure not. there are more intelligent ways to do that. is wikimania a business, i.e. the organizer want to get as much money out of the conference as possible? for sure not. there are other conference topics which are more promising.
If there is interest by participants to chip in on scholarships for others to attend, I'm not sure providing an outlet for that interest means opening any cans, full of worms or other critters. It's an efficient matching of donor interest to funding needed.
imo we should clearly focus everything we do towards the core mission. if wikimania is not serving this mission, than we probably do not need wikimania. if we need more money for wikimania, use the established banner. if we want to have topic bound donations, then use the banner and let the user choose the topic important to her.
This presumes that the banner actually reaches everyone who might be inclined to donate. I find that presumption unfounded, particularly in the context for Wikimania which may very well attract potential donors that would either not be engaged by banners or not even see any (perhaps because he's an Armenian Wikibookian).
Furthermore, this apprach provides a severe disconnect between the opportunity to donate (i.e. the annual online campaign) and the salient incentive to do so (i.e. signing up for Wikimania and noticing there's a financial need to allow others to participate). Why would this be more effective?
personally i do not think "financial diversity" will do any good to the reputation of the wikimedia movement. the wikipedia website is one of the most prominent in the world. i am perceiving a site banner to donate money ok. all other means to raise money i find unacceptable and damaging the reputation. because we are perceived as "competitor"
- and this is not what we want to be. imo we should really strive to
have clear and consistent picture to the outside world which is not "consistently begging for money on every possibility we see". we want to be enabler so more persons find ways to support our goals.
I'm having a lot of difficulty understanding the reasoning here. This may be language-related, I don't know. In general, however, it's best practice for non-profit organizations/charities to be very open and clear about the fact that they are indeed pursuing a charitable purpose and that they are dependent on the support from donors. Fundraising is about building relationships with people that lead to support for the cause pursued, whether that's financial, material, political, or anything else really. Allowing people to provide that support the easiest, most convenient way at the most salient moments is an essential part of that. So providing that opportunity at Wikimania registration can only be applauded.
i am aware as WMUK needs to go begging for money at WMF is automatically triggering such ideas. and i probably would have similar ideas in case i would be WMUK. the solution is to fix the money flow. the income needs to come to an organisation as close to the donor as possible so a donor can walk over and slap the receiver in case of inefficiency.
Isn't this sort of contradictory to your earlier statement? While I would object to the language of "slapping" anyone really, allowing Wikimedia participants to donate to conference scholarships at time of registration is about as close a connection between donation and use as possible. Using the annual online campaign for Wikimania-specifc fundraising is rather the opposite.
I would also object to the term "begging". No one is "begging" for money, neither the foundation from (potential) donors nor chapters from the foundation. It's a hugely loaded term that denigrates fundraising without actually saying much.
Cheers,
Sebastian Moleski Schatzmeister / Treasurer ------------------------------------- Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin
Telefon 030 - 219 158 26-0 www.wikimedia.de
Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei! http://spenden.wikimedia.de/
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
uuh - i am not sure if one should open that can of worms. what is the
purpose of wikimania? is it to raise money? for sure not. there are more intelligent ways to do that. is wikimania a business, i.e. the organizer want to get as much money out of the conference as possible? for sure not. there are other conference topics which are more promising.
If there is interest by participants to chip in on scholarships for others to attend, I'm not sure providing an outlet for that interest means opening any cans, full of worms or other critters. It's an efficient matching of donor interest to funding needed.
Quite! I can certainly see there being people (probably some Wikimedians) who would be interested in making a donation to help others (certainly Wikimedians) to get to Wikimania. Much more interested than they are in giving to WMF's general funds to pay for cups of coffee for developers. Of course, this might result in very few donations and not be worth the effort, but you don't know until you've tried it.
By contrast I'd guess that very few banner-campaign donors are interested in Wikimania at all.
Chris
On 11 November 2015 at 13:50, Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:
If there is interest by participants to chip in on scholarships for others to attend, I'm not sure providing an outlet for that interest means opening any cans, full of worms or other critters. It's an efficient matching of donor interest to funding needed.
Quite! I can certainly see there being people (probably some Wikimedians) who would be interested in making a donation to help others (certainly Wikimedians) to get to Wikimania.
Yes, I'd agree with Chris and Sebastian - donating to a scholarship fund is greatly appealing. I probably won't be able to go this year (too much travel in a short time...) but I'd be more than happy to put some of the money I'd have spent towards the scholarship fund, if Federico says they'll be able to accept such donations.
On Nov 11, 2015 14:50, "Chris Keating" chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:
uuh - i am not sure if one should open that can of worms. what is the purpose of wikimania? is it to raise money? for sure not. there are more intelligent ways to do that. is wikimania a business, i.e. the organizer want to get as much money out of the conference as possible? for sure not. there are other conference topics which are more promising.
If there is interest by participants to chip in on scholarships for
others to attend, I'm not sure providing an outlet for that interest means opening any cans, full of worms or other critters. It's an efficient matching of donor interest to funding needed.
Quite! I can certainly see there being people (probably some Wikimedians)
who would be interested in making a donation to help others (certainly Wikimedians) to get to Wikimania. Much more interested than they are in giving to WMF's general funds to pay for cups of coffee for developers. Of course, this might result in very few donations and not be worth the effort, but you don't know until you've tried it.
By contrast I'd guess that very few banner-campaign donors are interested
in Wikimania at all.
Lol, Sebastian, I do not dare imagine these critters :-) I was just imagining the number of persons using the registration page multiplied by the amount I would be prepared to donate, considering when the money flows in. Compared to the effort administering this.
Otoh my colleagues ask me every year how the money is spent and if they should pay. I would answer hosting+Internet , software development and make the volunteers meet, as knowing each other tends to create a much nicer atmosphere which leads to more contributions. Chris, every single person I met thought collecting for these items is a good idea. But I met a significant number of persons who did think collecting outside the banner is bad. The reasons were quite diverse, as were the various ways of money taken in those persons had in mind.
My first and second question would be: how much money you expect? Why not just ask to increase the budget for wikimania by this number writing one mail?
Best, Rupert
wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org