El 05/10/2015 a las 04:18 a.m., Josh Lim escribió:
Pavel, with all do respect, I HIGHLY doubt there’s anything to celebrate here.
+1
While I agree that the Wikimania process is broken, no one would’ve thought that the way we’d go about fixing that process would be handing that process over to a small group of people who can easily say “Oh! This doesn’t work—let’s throw it out.” For goodness’ sake, James claimed they talked to people—our question then is who did they talk to? They certainly didn’t talk to us, and there DEFINITELY was no discussion taking place on Meta or anywhere else!
A lot of work was poured into the Manila and Perth bids, and at least for us here in Manila, we’re doing so because it was suggested (by Ellie, nonetheless!) to do so for the 2017 bid process. If you seriously, seriously think that we will stand idly by and see this process be rammed down our throats while at the same time being advised that all our work is meaningless at this point, you’ve really got to be kidding us.
With all due respect to the Montreal team, AFAIK the place where "the community" looks for information about future bids for Wikimania is Meta. So far, I could see only Perth and Bali. Well, until James deleted what was posted there reflecting this decision -and the best part is the edit reason: */Correct this to not lie. Oy./*
So yeah, if you think your idea of meaningful change is top-down diktat by a group of people who say “Enough is enough!” but without considering not just the open nature of our movement and the inherent need for discussion to take place before such drastic moves are taken, then I’m sorry, but this is utter hypocrisy. You can’t have your cake by saying that we should value open communication between stakeholders in a movement like Wikimedia, and at the same time eat it too by saying that top-down decision making is acceptable when a process is broken.
Simply, rename the whole thing to Wikimedia, Inc. and problem solved. That way you can /fuck the community /because TBH, you just don't care.