Mav wrote:
quote
"...But, IMO, we should seriously consider a better place for the Wikimedia main office before hiring lots of people. St Pete is fine as a tourist destination and maybe even as a satellite office of the foundation given that two board members and Danny live there, but the host city of the main office of an international organization? Sorry, but no.
Washington D.C. or NYC are places where almost every nation of world sends their ambassadors and where a multitude of other international organizations, which we really should be working closely with, are based. Talent pool is another consideration; many more people with the relevant experience we need already live in those cities."
---
As on several earlier occasions I disagree with Mav on how Wikimedia money would be best spent. Washington D.C. or NYC are very expensive cities. Besides, those are cities with heavily political connotations. Of course there is no such thing as a political neutral location. Maybe St Petersburg USA comes close, not sure ;)
We might show the world that we still do things differently, not per se, but when there is a good reason for it. We might do something substantial for the underdeveloped world by placing our head office in e.g. Africa or India. Wikimedia involvement in many underdeveloped countries is still largely lagging behind. We might reach out and make a powerful gesture of good faith in the potential of those parts of the world.
To name just one example: Nairobi would be a capable host city. Even the UN has a head office there. Running an office in Africa or India would be much cheaper. In a web-connected world travel times and costs are no longer very strong arguments against this.
Erik Zachte