My argument to that is that eventually we'd be in the situation where no
bids are viable. The proposed rotation system would hopefully provide
enough prep time to alleviate that.
On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 at 16:07 Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 7 October 2015 at 22:54, Joseph Fox
<josephfoxwiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Any way one tries to obtain a representative
sample of something, it's
never going to be totally representative. We are a massive, massive
community, and I'm really not sure direct democracy works in this
instance.
This isn't a problem with Wikimania selection
but rather with politics.
What would be best: A group of users selecting locations for an annual
conference, a jury that is voted in, or just putting the conference
locations up for a general vote among the community? I for one would
rather
a small collection of people who have experience
with Wikimania, and what
makes for a good conference, make the final call—elected or otherwise.
thats what we had people suggested places and put together a proposal as
to why their location. A jury was selected, the bids where then discussed
and further developed in depth at the end the jury chose the best
available. It took from September to December for the public process,
those who really wanted the event spent time preparing for the process.
I feel this conversation is getting somewhat tangled at this point.
Joe
--
Gnangarra
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>