[Wikimedia-l] Re: Seeking community recommendations for Equity Fund grantees

+1 Let's think we get funding for uploading a collection of images from, let's say, the exclusion of LGBT women in Myanmar (this is an example), and we think this fits perfectly in the Equity Funds grant goals. Well... it doesn't matter, Pattypan is broken. We can't upload images massively. Let's make our system work and THEN we can start creating cool things in a more equitable way. ________________________________ From: Gnangarra &lt;gnangarra(a)gmail.com&gt; Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 10:53 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List &lt;wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org&gt; Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Seeking community recommendations for Equity Fund grantees Perhaps the Equity Fund could invest a few million in developing, building, and sustaining the Community Tech team to help it fix all the underlying problems that continue to plague the projects. They could then provide equity of coverage across all projects, improve participation across all countries. On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 at 15:35, Peter Southwood <peter.southwood@telkomsa.net<mailto:peter.southwood@telkomsa.net>> wrote: Good points, these. I hope someone will answer them. Cheers, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Inductiveload [mailto:inductiveload@gmail.com<mailto:inductiveload@gmail.com>] Sent: 26 January 2022 02:36 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Seeking community recommendations for Equity Fund grantees On 25 January 2022 17:11:59 GMT, Nadee Gunasena <ngunasena@wikimedia.org<mailto:ngunasena@wikimedia.org>> wrote: Besides how the grants are allocated in the first place, something I do not see on that page is the clear description of how the success of the grants are measured and reported, auditing of expenditures and when the results are due. From the Meta page: whose work will impact and improve knowledge equity on the Wikimedia projects over the long term. Thus I imagine a good part of the results will be able to be tied to long term changes that will be measurable as some kind of wiki engagement? If the results are not expected to manifest "on-wiki", where and when are they expected to manifest? Obviously, "long term" implies no final results "soon", but responsible management means that the outcomes of interest are, of course, known already along with a plan for follow-up analysis. No self-respecting organisation would spend over $7 million without even a way to tell if the money is being spent as promised, or no way to tell if the project is working or has lasting effects. For context, it's enough money to keep the servers on for years, or, as about 50 person-years of payroll and overhead expenditure, keep a modest dev team trucking for a decade or so. The story of what knowledge-societal good has been done with this amount of money will be absolutely fascinating to anyone with an interest in knowledge equity, and critical to justifying support for similar initiatives in future. The analysis and accurate reporting of the outcomes of these grants is at least as valuable to future similar efforts as the grants themselves. Imagine the utterly disastrous effect it would have if it were impossible to showcase the success: it could undermine the whole idea of knowledge equity in general as a worthwhile financial cause, and within the wiki movement, it would badly injure the concept that funds donated in good faith are spent carefully. I look forward to reading in detail about what outcomes have been selected to be tracked, how and why that selection was made, how each grant is expected and hoped to affect them, and when and how we may be expected to find out how it went, both "on the ground" for the grantees and in terms of the already-set outcomes. These are all things that must already have been carefully documented. Down the road, a thorough breakdown of how it actually did go and how it can be done better, if possible, for future rounds will be a cornerstone of best-practice for knowledge equity initiatives for years to come. Cheers, --IL _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/ message/TGZK3JNX4FLBZIIQB6GUBXL7IMPE4CV2/<https://lists.wikimedia.org/hy… To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org> -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org… To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org> -- GN.