The core mission of our projects is to share in the sum of all knowledge.
Gender gap and number of long time editors are, while important, a side
show. This was a conference with a specific public in mind and all about
chapters and their best practices. It is equally a side show. For diversity
we have separate conferences and Wikimania is all about the community of
long time editors.
Your notions about evaluating the presence of many people was first about
the HUGE amount of money involved and a notion that only a small number of
conference goers per chapter were "best practice". Both have been
debunked. The amount of money is small, many of the conference goers turned
out to present at the conference and all of the people involved benefited
by getting better connected with their international colleagues. THAT was
the objective of the conference.
If you want to evaluate how we are doing on the basis of our core mission,
lets do that. I am game. I found based on the interactions with people from
several chapters that they do make a big difference they do enable
volunteers to do more/better. When you want to discuss Wikipedia fine, it
can do better and I often blog how I think it can do better. When you only
care about gender gap and user engagement, I blog about that too.
When you talk about irony, it is ironic that I have to remind you what our
core mission is.
On 3 June 2014 03:19, Russavia <russavia.wikipedia(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com
Do you remember like me reading why these people came to this conference?
In that light, do your remarks provide us with any connection to these
objectives? .Do you know the topics of the presentations given? Do you
the topics of the conversations that happened
inside and outside the
scheduled meetings? Can you imagine that the result may be increased
cooperation and less waste because of shared information on best
Well my comments were pretty much common sense comments based upon my silly
assumption that the conference was related to the core mission of our
I sincerely hope that the irony isn't lost on people that here we have a
conference, which was supposedly all about best practices, yet when someone
has asked for information on how much was spent by one chapter (who sent an
extraordinary EIGHT people), instead of following best practice of
transparency (i.e. answering the question), the person was met with
deflection. Of course, it is entirely possible "that" memo hadn't filtered
down to Richard Symonds, but I think the most likely comment one could make
WELCOME TO WIKIMEDIA.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: