On 19 March 2015 at 00:52, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Therefore, I propose that someone try some editathons where half the tickets are auctioned, the other half are raffled, and the Foundation pays to support them if and only if the auction fails to pay all of the expenses in advance, and then only the difference. This will allow them to become more exclusive, but not completely exclusive, (...)
I'm a bit lost here. At the moment, editathons are (almost?) always free to attend, though some are tacked onto a paying event (eg a conference); when "ticketed", this is usually to control numbers when space is limited. This model works pretty well and makes them popular events; indeed, they're one of our most visible public activities.
I don't see where the benefit would come from selling - or raffling, auctioning, etc- tickets. It would invariably deter attendees and reduce uptake; why would making them more exclusive be a *good* thing? We want as many people as possible to attend, and most do not run at absolute capacity.
This looks like a problem rather than a solution, even assuming we need a solution at all. Yes, it would be nice if they were cost-neutral - but the cost of running editathons is, in my experience, not high. There are probably easier savings to be made by WMF.