On 9/29/06, Alison Wheeler <wikimedia(a)alisonwheeler.com> wrote:
One thing I would definitely say though is that this
process did point up
a few things that need sorting before the next city is chosen.
1. Travel costs; should be researched centrally by WMF or someone
independent from all the bids. It was clear that this caused great
friction in this year's bids as Taipei - by their own admission - used
this year's prices without taxes and surcharges even though actual-date
flight information and charges were available and used by other bids. This
meant that the bids information was clearly biased and inconsistent and
could mislead the analysts.
Whether or not the data were or were not biased or inconsistent, they
are certainly subject to change, gas prices, politics, etc.
2. What is the *point* of Wikimania? Is it just for
editors of Wikimedia
projects? Is it for technical/academic purposes? Is is (as we in London
had planned) a way to expand the 'reach' and use of the Wikimedia projects
to the wider population and not just those already in the FLOSS/wiki
sphere?
This is the most poignant criticism of the process. You are exactly
right. What the purpose of a gathering is will change over time, as
WM has - WM05-06-07. It is certainly not for the convenience of the
majority of editors. It is, apparently in 2007, a "bold move" and
"evangelical" for a huge population of users who are on the rise. But
yes, the point is, this discussion has not reached consensus.
3. Extending from both of these points is that of who
the attendees are;
the demographics of our editors and how much disposable income they have
to be able to fly around the world. In essence this is an old-fashioned
network routing calculation as whilst some people may be expensed to
attend Wikimania (the board, for example, and some presenters) most
attendees aren't and if we aim for 'free and open source' then we should
also aim for 'cheap and easy travel' too.
See above. NP complete problems are notoriously difficult to solve. =)
4. A last thought on location is the one of language
and locality. The
nationality of the host location and its 'default language' don't have
that much effect on the conference itself - our working language is
english, after all - but they do on the attendees ability to travel
in-country and enjoy anything the location might offer outwith the
conference.
We shall see how that works out.
Could I also suggest that we should be seeking an
'independence of view'
from all people concerned with deciding on a venue or employees of same.
Brad's support for Torino during the selection period, and Jimbo's recent
comment here are, to my mind, very out of place and could easily suggest
to many that there is pressure being brought on them.
Third-person use alert:
Brad commented that the Torino bid looked great. Please note,
however, the following:
a) Brad was *never* asked - not *once* to have any input in the
process by any member of the community, board member, or jury member.
Had I not been following along on the wiki myself, I would never had
known about the selection process, deadlines, applicants, finalists,
or winner. Does *that* strike you as odd?
b) Brad explicity understood this process to be a *community* process
(the merits of which we - and do - disagree about) - see above - but
consider the response if he jumps in and says "I'm running this now".
/me doesn't think that would be acceptable.
c) So long as there was not rampant fraud or other evidence of
hijacking, which judging by the fall out might not be a clear answer,
why should this not be considered to be an acceptable community
process? If you are suggesting that anything Jimbo or I said to
anyone had an effect, please show me where to look for its effect,
because it sure isn't in the result.
I was dishearted, indeed, to see that people were
making suppositions
about different candidate cities external to the information those cities
made available about their offerings and that - if geographical
considerations are to form a part of the decision-makiong process - they
need to be clarified in advance and applied equally.
Which "people" were making what suppositions? I don't understand the
implication you are trying to reach, save for your feeling screwed.
As for me, I have never been to any of the *applicant* cities, much
less finalists, except Orlando, FL. If you want to know about the
United States, I'm your man. I am very widely traveled on this
continent. If you want to know about elsewhere, ask Jimbo. He's does
laps around other world travelers. But how external knowledge of a
place fits in to your argument, sorry, does not compute.
Alison Wheeler
--
Brad Patrick
General Counsel & Interim Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
bradp.wmf(a)gmail.com
727-231-0101