Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Le 04/10/15 00:13, Nathan a écrit :
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a... _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
As member of this community, I would to shortly comment in my individual capacity.
The situation is completely embarassing. Yeah, it is.
The community met during Wikimania. - We discussed committee membership. - We discussed moving away from the current bidding process, which is, - in our opinion, broken - We discussed making Montreal our choice, to be announced at the *earliest* convenience (keep in mind this was discussed in July), as part of our new process but only after talking with the Montreal team - We finally discussed a notion of location with global areas Very rough notes of that meeting were posted on meta : https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Committee/2015-07-16
We closed that meeting with the following todos - Ellie had to check with Montreal (which she did) - James had to propose areas (which he did) - the committee had to meet again a month later (which it did)
When August meeting came, - we discussed and finalized membership (keep in mind that not all members were in July meeting and not all members were in August meeting) - Ellie informed us that Montreal team was happy to move forward and we planned an announcement - James proposed a set of areas, with propositions for the coming years - James proposed a draft of announcement
AND THIS IS WHERE THE WHOLE SITUATION BUGGED
The announcement of the new bidding system, the locations and Montreal were in one document only. And the problem is that the committee did not agree collectively with the area chosen, nor with the predetermination proposed. (I, in particular, indicated my (very) deep disagreement that middle and south africa were completely excluded from the list. I expressed my (serious) desire that the decision of the rotation places be not made now by the committee, but with community input). The committee concluded that 1) the draft announcement was to be reworked and that 2) we would announce the new system and seek input from the community before its finalization in the following weeks.
This was over a month ago. Since then, what happened ? We made some improvements to the draft. Iolanda tried to push for the announcement of the new process and of Montreal to be made. Ellie noted that the organizer of Montreal was on a leave for 3 weeks and that she would prefer to wait his return and a visit to Canada to finalize things more, and that she would rather that the new process be announced as part of a larger community consultation that would include discussion both about the program and the future location, to be held in October.
And there you are... there is this...dual situation between ... the community wanting to know as soon as possible, so as to weigth in the decision... and the staff... who want to polish things as much as possible before any public announcement and call for input. And of course... these two tendancies are not fully compatible. And a pinch of feeling of "non ownership" from committee members, as only the Chair of the committee should be the one to finalize and send the announcement.
Eh :)
Well, there you are. Now things are out.
We are indeed seriously considering Montreal pending a site visit this month (october).
Josh, for the record, I am very sorry because I had no idea you were preparing a bid. I thought only Montreal had been really. This is actually part of the reasons why we wish to change the biding process. We have seen too many teams work like crazy for weeks, even months, to prepare a bid that will go nowhere because another city will be winning. This is such a loss of energy and time ! We think it would be so much positive to get community members to focus more on building a great program more than on finding the proper venue/hotel/restaurant etc.
Hopefully, James will be available to post a clearer and complete message early next week on that topic. Bottom line is that there is a community consultation planned on that topic.
Again, I post this in my personal capacity.
Florence
All of this could be read as "let's make a call for community input for the sake of political correctness, so the community thinks their opinion is important for us....but we have taken the decision several months ago anyway".
M.
El 04/10/2015 a las 02:38 a.m., Florence Devouard escribió:
Le 04/10/15 00:13, Nathan a écrit :
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
As member of this community, I would to shortly comment in my individual capacity.
The situation is completely embarassing. Yeah, it is.
The community met during Wikimania.
- We discussed committee membership.
- We discussed moving away from the current bidding process, which is,
- in our opinion, broken
- We discussed making Montreal our choice, to be announced at the
*earliest* convenience (keep in mind this was discussed in July), as part of our new process but only after talking with the Montreal team
- We finally discussed a notion of location with global areas
Very rough notes of that meeting were posted on meta : https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Committee/2015-07-16
We closed that meeting with the following todos
- Ellie had to check with Montreal (which she did)
- James had to propose areas (which he did)
- the committee had to meet again a month later (which it did)
When August meeting came,
- we discussed and finalized membership (keep in mind that not all
members were in July meeting and not all members were in August meeting)
- Ellie informed us that Montreal team was happy to move forward and
we planned an announcement
- James proposed a set of areas, with propositions for the coming years
- James proposed a draft of announcement
AND THIS IS WHERE THE WHOLE SITUATION BUGGED
The announcement of the new bidding system, the locations and Montreal were in one document only. And the problem is that the committee did not agree collectively with the area chosen, nor with the predetermination proposed. (I, in particular, indicated my (very) deep disagreement that middle and south africa were completely excluded from the list. I expressed my (serious) desire that the decision of the rotation places be not made now by the committee, but with community input). The committee concluded that 1) the draft announcement was to be reworked and that 2) we would announce the new system and seek input from the community before its finalization in the following weeks.
This was over a month ago. Since then, what happened ? We made some improvements to the draft. Iolanda tried to push for the announcement of the new process and of Montreal to be made. Ellie noted that the organizer of Montreal was on a leave for 3 weeks and that she would prefer to wait his return and a visit to Canada to finalize things more, and that she would rather that the new process be announced as part of a larger community consultation that would include discussion both about the program and the future location, to be held in October.
And there you are... there is this...dual situation between ... the community wanting to know as soon as possible, so as to weigth in the decision... and the staff... who want to polish things as much as possible before any public announcement and call for input. And of course... these two tendancies are not fully compatible. And a pinch of feeling of "non ownership" from committee members, as only the Chair of the committee should be the one to finalize and send the announcement.
Eh :)
Well, there you are. Now things are out.
We are indeed seriously considering Montreal pending a site visit this month (october).
Josh, for the record, I am very sorry because I had no idea you were preparing a bid. I thought only Montreal had been really. This is actually part of the reasons why we wish to change the biding process. We have seen too many teams work like crazy for weeks, even months, to prepare a bid that will go nowhere because another city will be winning. This is such a loss of energy and time ! We think it would be so much positive to get community members to focus more on building a great program more than on finding the proper venue/hotel/restaurant etc.
Hopefully, James will be available to post a clearer and complete message early next week on that topic. Bottom line is that there is a community consultation planned on that topic.
Again, I post this in my personal capacity.
Florence
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Yes, that too.
Pine On Oct 4, 2015 12:02 AM, "Carlos M. Colina" maorx@wikimedia.org.ve wrote:
All of this could be read as "let's make a call for community input for the sake of political correctness, so the community thinks their opinion is important for us....but we have taken the decision several months ago anyway".
M.
El 04/10/2015 a las 02:38 a.m., Florence Devouard escribió:
Le 04/10/15 00:13, Nathan a écrit :
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a... _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
As member of this community, I would to shortly comment in my individual capacity.
The situation is completely embarassing. Yeah, it is.
The community met during Wikimania.
- We discussed committee membership.
- We discussed moving away from the current bidding process, which is, -
in our opinion, broken
- We discussed making Montreal our choice, to be announced at the
*earliest* convenience (keep in mind this was discussed in July), as part of our new process but only after talking with the Montreal team
- We finally discussed a notion of location with global areas
Very rough notes of that meeting were posted on meta : https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Committee/2015-07-16
We closed that meeting with the following todos
- Ellie had to check with Montreal (which she did)
- James had to propose areas (which he did)
- the committee had to meet again a month later (which it did)
When August meeting came,
- we discussed and finalized membership (keep in mind that not all
members were in July meeting and not all members were in August meeting)
- Ellie informed us that Montreal team was happy to move forward and we
planned an announcement
- James proposed a set of areas, with propositions for the coming years
- James proposed a draft of announcement
AND THIS IS WHERE THE WHOLE SITUATION BUGGED
The announcement of the new bidding system, the locations and Montreal were in one document only. And the problem is that the committee did not agree collectively with the area chosen, nor with the predetermination proposed. (I, in particular, indicated my (very) deep disagreement that middle and south africa were completely excluded from the list. I expressed my (serious) desire that the decision of the rotation places be not made now by the committee, but with community input). The committee concluded that
- the draft announcement was to be reworked and that 2) we would announce
the new system and seek input from the community before its finalization in the following weeks.
This was over a month ago. Since then, what happened ? We made some improvements to the draft. Iolanda tried to push for the announcement of the new process and of Montreal to be made. Ellie noted that the organizer of Montreal was on a leave for 3 weeks and that she would prefer to wait his return and a visit to Canada to finalize things more, and that she would rather that the new process be announced as part of a larger community consultation that would include discussion both about the program and the future location, to be held in October.
And there you are... there is this...dual situation between ... the community wanting to know as soon as possible, so as to weigth in the decision... and the staff... who want to polish things as much as possible before any public announcement and call for input. And of course... these two tendancies are not fully compatible. And a pinch of feeling of "non ownership" from committee members, as only the Chair of the committee should be the one to finalize and send the announcement.
Eh :)
Well, there you are. Now things are out.
We are indeed seriously considering Montreal pending a site visit this month (october).
Josh, for the record, I am very sorry because I had no idea you were preparing a bid. I thought only Montreal had been really. This is actually part of the reasons why we wish to change the biding process. We have seen too many teams work like crazy for weeks, even months, to prepare a bid that will go nowhere because another city will be winning. This is such a loss of energy and time ! We think it would be so much positive to get community members to focus more on building a great program more than on finding the proper venue/hotel/restaurant etc.
Hopefully, James will be available to post a clearer and complete message early next week on that topic. Bottom line is that there is a community consultation planned on that topic.
Again, I post this in my personal capacity.
Florence
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain." Carlos M. Colina Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 | www.wikimedia.org.ve http://wikimedia.org.ve Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee Phone: +972-52-4869915 Twitter: @maor_x _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 03/10/2015 23:13, Nathan wrote:
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
Not so much the Signpost as 梁忠明.[1]
KTC
[1]: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-October/079246.html
You could excuse the Perth and Manila bid teams for being very angry at having wasted a lot of time and energy when the decision was apparently made behind closed doors weeks ago. Even if you think the idea of getting rid of the expensive bid process is a good idea (and I do), the way that this was not communicated to the community is simply abominable.
Cheers, Craig
On 4 October 2015 at 08:13, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a... _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Sigh. Decisions being made behind closed doors and then being announced much later than they should have been is a bit of a WMF pattern that I would like to see addressed. My understanding is that Lila is putting some emphasis on improved communications in Q2, and I would be interested in seeing some specific measures put in place to address the kind of situation that seems to have happened again here.
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Craig Franklin cfranklin@halonetwork.net wrote:
You could excuse the Perth and Manila bid teams for being very angry at having wasted a lot of time and energy when the decision was apparently made behind closed doors weeks ago. Even if you think the idea of getting rid of the expensive bid process is a good idea (and I do), the way that this was not communicated to the community is simply abominable.
Cheers, Craig
On 4 October 2015 at 08:13, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community" seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet there doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see here. A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated is clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at all.
Cheers, Craig
On 4 October 2015 at 13:25, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Sigh. Decisions being made behind closed doors and then being announced much later than they should have been is a bit of a WMF pattern that I would like to see addressed. My understanding is that Lila is putting some emphasis on improved communications in Q2, and I would be interested in seeing some specific measures put in place to address the kind of situation that seems to have happened again here.
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Craig Franklin cfranklin@halonetwork.net wrote:
You could excuse the Perth and Manila bid teams for being very angry at having wasted a lot of time and energy when the decision was apparently made behind closed doors weeks ago. Even if you think the idea of
getting
rid of the expensive bid process is a good idea (and I do), the way that this was not communicated to the community is simply abominable.
Cheers, Craig
On 4 October 2015 at 08:13, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal
has
been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I will be happy to learn of any specific and measurable new goals WMF has for movement communications and specific plans for how those goals will be achieved. I agree that vague statements about improved communication are insufficient.
Pine On Oct 3, 2015 8:36 PM, "Craig Franklin" cfranklin@halonetwork.net wrote:
I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community" seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet there doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see here. A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated is clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at all.
Cheers, Craig
On 4 October 2015 at 13:25, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Sigh. Decisions being made behind closed doors and then being announced much later than they should have been is a bit of a WMF pattern that I would like to see addressed. My understanding is that Lila is putting
some
emphasis on improved communications in Q2, and I would be interested in seeing some specific measures put in place to address the kind of
situation
that seems to have happened again here.
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Craig Franklin <
cfranklin@halonetwork.net>
wrote:
You could excuse the Perth and Manila bid teams for being very angry at having wasted a lot of time and energy when the decision was apparently made behind closed doors weeks ago. Even if you think the idea of
getting
rid of the expensive bid process is a good idea (and I do), the way
that
this was not communicated to the community is simply abominable.
Cheers, Craig
On 4 October 2015 at 08:13, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal
has
been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process
that
completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new
method
before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Le 04/10/2015 05:36, Craig Franklin a écrit :
I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community" seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet there doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see here. A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated is clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at all.
I wouldn't say that the WMF communication is simply bad, it is pretty professional.
It may rather be that an open communication and keeping control on the greater part of the decisions (or even conducting the users of the projets themself, as an average internet company does), are "two tendancies that are not fully compatible" (to borrow Florence's words).
-- Mathias Damour [[User:Astirmays]]
Yes and no. Considering that I've been waiting for months for answers to questions about the WMF Annual Plan, I would say that there is much room for improvement in communications.
On the other hand, the WMF Comms department itself seems to more or less ok, and I personally think we'll of WMF's chief communications officer.
So, some good points, and some room to improve. I agree that the status quo has been this way for awhile and it would be good to see across-the-board communications SLAs.
Pine On Oct 4, 2015 12:18 AM, "Mathias Damour" mathias.damour@laposte.net wrote:
Le 04/10/2015 05:36, Craig Franklin a écrit :
I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community" seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet there doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see here. A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated is clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at all.
I wouldn't say that the WMF communication is simply bad, it is pretty professional.
It may rather be that an open communication and keeping control on the greater part of the decisions (or even conducting the users of the projets themself, as an average internet company does), are "two tendancies that are not fully compatible" (to borrow Florence's words).
-- Mathias Damour [[User:Astirmays]]
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I thought the mandate of this committee was to facilitate and coordinate bidding, set up policy and best practices. The page on Meta still mention the same as its purpose[1].
When did a committee intended to facilitate an already established, open process make the leap to downright owning the process and instead, doing away with it all together? We went from an open jury system to finalizing things behind closed doors in a physical meeting that seemingly the same people attend regularly.
It's downright patronizing to hear plans about rotating wikimania from Europe (excluding eastern Europe for some reason?), to North america and the "rest of the world". This seems more like someone picking holiday destinations, talking about countries, entire continents and rest of the world, in a manner so cavalier.
It's constantly mentioned that the open bidding process is unwieldy and too cumbersome. While that may be true for the bidding teams, it's still an open, accessible process that gives everyone the same chance. The entire idea of the committee was to move the process away from a single individual's initiative to a group, not make the same individual chair who just does away with the entire process and decides things on a whim.
Lastly, I don't think this is the usual WMF communication shortfall. This is more of a committee issue, with its quasi-official status, they took some liberty with the entire process and their own stated purpose, made some sweeping changes and forgot to tell anyone, for months. The foundation could have been as out of the loop as the rest of us.
Theo
[1]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Committee#Purpose_and_process
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Yes and no. Considering that I've been waiting for months for answers to questions about the WMF Annual Plan, I would say that there is much room for improvement in communications.
On the other hand, the WMF Comms department itself seems to more or less ok, and I personally think we'll of WMF's chief communications officer.
So, some good points, and some room to improve. I agree that the status quo has been this way for awhile and it would be good to see across-the-board communications SLAs.
Pine On Oct 4, 2015 12:18 AM, "Mathias Damour" mathias.damour@laposte.net wrote:
Le 04/10/2015 05:36, Craig Franklin a écrit :
I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community" seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet
there
doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see
here.
A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated
is
clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at
all.
I wouldn't say that the WMF communication is simply bad, it is pretty professional.
It may rather be that an open communication and keeping control on the greater part of the decisions (or even conducting the users of the
projets
themself, as an average internet company does), are "two tendancies that are not fully compatible" (to borrow Florence's words).
-- Mathias Damour [[User:Astirmays]]
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Le 04/10/15 16:15, Theo10011 a écrit :
I thought the mandate of this committee was to facilitate and coordinate bidding, set up policy and best practices. The page on Meta still mention the same as its purpose[1].
When did a committee intended to facilitate an already established, open process make the leap to downright owning the process and instead, doing away with it all together? We went from an open jury system to finalizing things behind closed doors in a physical meeting that seemingly the same people attend regularly.
It's downright patronizing to hear plans about rotating wikimania from Europe (excluding eastern Europe for some reason?), to North america and the "rest of the world". This seems more like someone picking holiday destinations, talking about countries, entire continents and rest of the world, in a manner so cavalier.
It's constantly mentioned that the open bidding process is unwieldy and too cumbersome. While that may be true for the bidding teams, it's still an open, accessible process that gives everyone the same chance. The entire idea of the committee was to move the process away from a single individual's initiative to a group, not make the same individual chair who just does away with the entire process and decides things on a whim.
Lastly, I don't think this is the usual WMF communication shortfall. This is more of a committee issue, with its quasi-official status, they took some liberty with the entire process and their own stated purpose, made some sweeping changes and forgot to tell anyone, for months. The foundation could have been as out of the loop as the rest of us.
Theo
There are roughly three components on the Wikimania committee. One component is WMF staff. One component is former and future Wikimania organizers. One component is community members.
WMF staff does not have the same obligations and standards than the other members.
The rather unique situation of this committee is that... whilst it should include much community input... for most years (not all), Wikimania is actually mostly funded by WMF and beyond funding, some WMF staff put quite a bit of work in it. To say it bluntly, most of the time, without WMF input, Wikimania would simply not happen. This is no criticism to local teams (without them, Wikimania would not occur either), but a simple statement. WMF is a key stakeholder. What is the consequence of that from a committee member perspective ?
In my opinion, the consequence to that is that community members on the committee do not feel that they "own" this committee. It "does" feel like being invited on a Wikimedia Foundation committee. And as such, it feels like a sort of special attention/listening should be given to WMF staff members on that committee. And when things go ashtray... we hesitate being bold. It is not about forgetting.
So... two examples...
1) early October, Io stated that we should really push the announcement; Ellie answered that Canada organizer was on an unplanned leave and that she would prefer to work more on the Canada case before any announcement; And here it goes... no announcement.
2) last message on the committee list was, on the 2nd, Ellie saying that "James F. is the owner of the process document announcement" and "I do think we should post something today if at all possible". Uh. I answered "yes please, post". What happened ? Nothing. James F. has not sent ANY message to the committee till the 21th of August (that is... 6 or 7 weeks ago ?) I have no idea why. Maybe there is a good reason. But did any members of the committee feel free to publish anything whilst James is the Chair and Ellie wants more time ? Well, obviously not.
Good thing the google docs were public, right ?
You are correct. This is not a "Wikimedia Foundation communication" by large shortfall. This is more of the committee. And this is because it is "too official" a committee.
Now, beside head rolling... (uh, ouch :)) what do you suggest to fix that ?
Anthere
[1]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Committee#Purpose_and_process
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Yes and no. Considering that I've been waiting for months for answers to questions about the WMF Annual Plan, I would say that there is much room for improvement in communications.
On the other hand, the WMF Comms department itself seems to more or less ok, and I personally think we'll of WMF's chief communications officer.
So, some good points, and some room to improve. I agree that the status quo has been this way for awhile and it would be good to see across-the-board communications SLAs.
Pine On Oct 4, 2015 12:18 AM, "Mathias Damour" mathias.damour@laposte.net wrote:
Le 04/10/2015 05:36, Craig Franklin a écrit :
I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community" seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet
there
doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see
here.
A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated
is
clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at
all.
I wouldn't say that the WMF communication is simply bad, it is pretty professional.
It may rather be that an open communication and keeping control on the greater part of the decisions (or even conducting the users of the
projets
themself, as an average internet company does), are "two tendancies that are not fully compatible" (to borrow Florence's words).
-- Mathias Damour [[User:Astirmays]]
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
2015-10-04 17:42 GMT+02:00 Florence Devouard anthere9@yahoo.com:
Le 04/10/15 16:15, Theo10011 a écrit : Now, beside head rolling... (uh, ouch :)) what do you suggest to fix that ?
I don't see that *anything* needs fixing here.
So, what happened? The Wikimania committee came to the conclusion that the current process to select the next Wikimania host is broken (and I think the committee was right about that). So something needed to happen - and the committee did something that we see not often enough in Wikimedia-land: *they made a decision*. A decision they were tasked to take: Think and decide on the next Wikimania host, and on the process to find one. Nobody ever said that their job was only to execute a set of old guidlines and processes (which, I guess, were never "community approved" but rather were around just for a long, long time).
So, t hey abandoned the process, came up with a new one, and decided who would host Wikimania in 2017 (Montreal seems a great choice, btw - I mean, a bilingual city has some great opportunities for us, right?).
Whats wrong with that? Nothing!
Let's face some truths here:
1.
Wikimania has become well too big to be run by volunteers. EVERY Wikimania since Danzig (at least) happened *only* because the WMF jumped in at one point of time to rescue the whole event. That is not to say that volunteers did not do a great job for Wikimania - but the job proved to be too big for volunteers, for at least five times in a row. So it was right to abandon the current process and replace it with something new.
2.
The new process has a lot of problems build in - I think, for example, that the decision to exclude major parts of the world from Wikimanias (except for every third year, when regions are "up to grabs) , is wrong. BUT: We now have at least 18 MONTHS to fix this (and possible other problems) - thanks to the bold decision of the Wikimania committee.
3.
"There are two things in the world you never want to let people see how you make 'em: laws and sausages" (Leo McGarry, The West Wing, "Five Votes Down"). And there is one thing Wikimedians in this world could not care less about : How the next host for Wikimania is found. Let's applaud the great people of the Wikimania Committee that they took on that task, came up with a great decision for 2017 AND implemented a new (even so not perfect) process while they were at it.
4.
I think with a lot of things in Wikimedia-land, we need MORE bold decisions (by whomever) , and LESS "community consultation" that only leads to some old-timers in en.WP and de.WP voice their anger and concerns, but rarely solves the problem that needs solving.
5. Dear Wikimania Committee: Your communication of thi s whole thing sucked , big time. Consider yourself scolded. Move on.
Cheers,
Pavel
[1]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Committee#Purpose_and_process
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Yes and no. Considering that I've been waiting for months for answers to
questions about the WMF Annual Plan, I would say that there is much room for improvement in communications.
On the other hand, the WMF Comms department itself seems to more or less ok, and I personally think we'll of WMF's chief communications officer.
So, some good points, and some room to improve. I agree that the status quo has been this way for awhile and it would be good to see across-the-board communications SLAs.
Pine On Oct 4, 2015 12:18 AM, "Mathias Damour" mathias.damour@laposte.net wrote:
Le 04/10/2015 05:36, Craig Franklin a écrit :
I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community"
seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet
there
doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see
here.
A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated
is
clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at
all.
I wouldn't say that the WMF communication is simply bad, it is pretty professional.
It may rather be that an open communication and keeping control on the greater part of the decisions (or even conducting the users of the
projets
themself, as an average internet company does), are "two tendancies that are not fully compatible" (to borrow Florence's words).
-- Mathias Damour [[User:Astirmays]]
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 04.10.2015 19:48, Pavel Richter wrote:
2015-10-04 17:42 GMT+02:00 Florence Devouard anthere9@yahoo.com:
Le 04/10/15 16:15, Theo10011 a écrit : Now, beside head rolling... (uh, ouch :)) what do you suggest to fix that ?
So, what happened? The Wikimania committee came to the conclusion that the current process to select the next Wikimania host is broken (and I think the committee was right about that). So something needed to happen - and the committee did something that we see not often enough in Wikimedia-land: *they made a decision*.
This is good.
But I think that the main point to fix is that a decision is valid as soon it is communicated.
At the moment it does not seem that the local communities were informed in order to know that the process was broken.
Kind regards
Am 04.10.2015 um 20:06 schrieb Ilario Valdelli:
On 04.10.2015 19:48, Pavel Richter wrote:
2015-10-04 17:42 GMT+02:00 Florence Devouard anthere9@yahoo.com:
Le 04/10/15 16:15, Theo10011 a écrit : Now, beside head rolling... (uh, ouch :)) what do you suggest to fix that ?
So, what happened? The Wikimania committee came to the conclusion that the current process to select the next Wikimania host is broken (and I think the committee was right about that). So something needed to happen - and the committee did something that we see not often enough in Wikimedia-land: *they made a decision*.
This is good.
But I think that the main point to fix is that a decision is valid as soon it is communicated.
At the moment it does not seem that the local communities were informed in order to know that the process was broken.
Kind regards
This fits in quite a number of decisions. Better no one can say that Wikimania isn't a community event anymore, but a Foundation event instead of.
Why asking anyone else?
Fuck the community, who cares?
As long as the "cabal" who "took full control" of Wikimania is capable of fully organizing it (or able to set up an organizing team anywhere in the world), I think this is nothing else but a step called: professionalisation.
Actually if it works well, it can bring this event to regions and places where otherwise it could not be made (i.e. lack of or insufficient or unreliable local volunteer manpower / no local org / whatever ) reducing the location problem only to logistics, thus widening the possibilities greatly.
I would love to see a fix event organizer team, let it be volunteer based (like the CEE meeting, which was a success) or paid staff (like WMDE has).
Balázs
2015-10-05 15:53 GMT+02:00 Steffen Prößdorf wiki@stepro.de:
Am 04.10.2015 um 20:06 schrieb Ilario Valdelli:
On 04.10.2015 19:48, Pavel Richter wrote:
2015-10-04 17:42 GMT+02:00 Florence Devouard anthere9@yahoo.com:
Le 04/10/15 16:15, Theo10011 a écrit :
Now, beside head rolling... (uh, ouch :)) what do you suggest to fix that ?
So, what happened? The Wikimania committee came to the conclusion that the current process to select the next Wikimania host is broken (and I think the committee was right about that). So something needed to happen - and the committee did something that we see not often enough in Wikimedia-land: *they made a decision*.
This is good.
But I think that the main point to fix is that a decision is valid as soon it is communicated.
At the moment it does not seem that the local communities were informed in order to know that the process was broken.
Kind regards
This fits in quite a number of decisions. Better no one can say that Wikimania isn't a community event anymore, but a Foundation event instead of.
Why asking anyone else?
Fuck the community, who cares?
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
It would be a step called professionalisation, too, if the WMF would use the amount of money they collected and still collecting and pay for writers and content. For sure it would be more professional. But it would not be the Wikipedia project thousands of volunteers work for anymore.
And that's the same point I see for Wikimania.
Steffen
Am 05.10.2015 um 17:03 schrieb Balázs Viczián:
As long as the "cabal" who "took full control" of Wikimania is capable of fully organizing it (or able to set up an organizing team anywhere in the world), I think this is nothing else but a step called: professionalisation.
Actually if it works well, it can bring this event to regions and places where otherwise it could not be made (i.e. lack of or insufficient or unreliable local volunteer manpower / no local org / whatever ) reducing the location problem only to logistics, thus widening the possibilities greatly.
I would love to see a fix event organizer team, let it be volunteer based (like the CEE meeting, which was a success) or paid staff (like WMDE has).
Balázs
2015-10-05 15:53 GMT+02:00 Steffen Prößdorf wiki@stepro.de:
Am 04.10.2015 um 20:06 schrieb Ilario Valdelli:
On 04.10.2015 19:48, Pavel Richter wrote:
2015-10-04 17:42 GMT+02:00 Florence Devouard anthere9@yahoo.com:
Le 04/10/15 16:15, Theo10011 a écrit :
Now, beside head rolling... (uh, ouch :)) what do you suggest to fix that ?
So, what happened? The Wikimania committee came to the conclusion that the current process to select the next Wikimania host is broken (and I think the committee was right about that). So something needed to happen - and the committee did something that we see not often enough in Wikimedia-land: *they made a decision*.
This is good.
But I think that the main point to fix is that a decision is valid as soon it is communicated.
At the moment it does not seem that the local communities were informed in order to know that the process was broken.
Kind regards
This fits in quite a number of decisions. Better no one can say that Wikimania isn't a community event anymore, but a Foundation event instead of.
Why asking anyone else?
Fuck the community, who cares?
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 4 October 2015 at 18:48, Pavel Richter mail@pavelrichter.de wrote: ...
Let's face some truths here: 5. Dear Wikimania Committee: Your communication of thi s whole thing sucked , big time. Consider yourself scolded. Move on.
BACKGROUND
Well, yes Pavel, of course "we" are going to move on. It's the old overused mantra of every time there is a blunder "it's in the past community, move along now". The problem is we should be able to also *see* measurable non-subjective changes and improvement to the way things are done, increasing transparency and putting the volunteer at the center of decision making, even if resources and most of the work are paid positions.
I really liked the early reply and effective apology by Florence: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-October/079256.html
But I found the response by the current Chair of the committee unconvincing. The attempt to change thread title and move to a far less subscribed email group, shows how the strategy is a quick political "nothing to see here" rather than leadership that shows active learning and openness: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-October/079273.html
CONCLUSION
It would be super if Florence would consider temporarily taking over as Chair, or starting a public process to ensure some new faces in the next few months, including a change of the Chairman. This would show the Committee recognizes this was a real serious failure which should see proportionate changes of roles on the Committee. If everything stays exactly the same for the next six months, then this would show the Committee is more interested in protecting itself, than ensuring that the unpaid volunteer and community consensus is central to the way this process *should* be seen to work, and in line with the original mandate for the Committee itself.
P.S. were I the current Chair, I think I would publicly apologise to Montreal before stepping down. The way this has been stitched up behind closed doors is probably an very unfair way for their hosting of Wikimania to be seen to start off. Most unfortunate.
Thanks, Fae
Le 04/10/15 21:03, Fæ a écrit :
On 4 October 2015 at 18:48, Pavel Richter mail@pavelrichter.de wrote: ...
Let's face some truths here: 5. Dear Wikimania Committee: Your communication of thi s whole thing sucked , big time. Consider yourself scolded. Move on.
BACKGROUND
Well, yes Pavel, of course "we" are going to move on. It's the old overused mantra of every time there is a blunder "it's in the past community, move along now". The problem is we should be able to also *see* measurable non-subjective changes and improvement to the way things are done, increasing transparency and putting the volunteer at the center of decision making, even if resources and most of the work are paid positions.
I really liked the early reply and effective apology by Florence: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-October/079256.html
But I found the response by the current Chair of the committee unconvincing. The attempt to change thread title and move to a far less subscribed email group, shows how the strategy is a quick political "nothing to see here" rather than leadership that shows active learning and openness: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-October/079273.html
CONCLUSION
It would be super if Florence would consider temporarily taking over as Chair, or starting a public process to ensure some new faces in the next few months, including a change of the Chairman. This would show the Committee recognizes this was a real serious failure which should see proportionate changes of roles on the Committee. If everything stays exactly the same for the next six months, then this would show the Committee is more interested in protecting itself, than ensuring that the unpaid volunteer and community consensus is central to the way this process *should* be seen to work, and in line with the original mandate for the Committee itself.
Hello
I appreciate the thought Fae. But I must face my own limitations :) I already struggle to keep up with my current commitments. It would not be wise and fair to anyone interested and/or impacted in that process to do that.
However, I do recognize that the lack of responsiveness of the Chair is an issue. I will bring this to the table at next meeting. It may also be that new faces be necessary. Since there will be an open discussion on Wikimania in a few weeks, I suggest that this point be raised and that any interested volunteer... raises his/her hand (that person should be a seasoned wikimedian and should not be a newbie with regards to Wikimania please).
Ant
P.S. were I the current Chair, I think I would publicly apologise to Montreal before stepping down. The way this has been stitched up behind closed doors is probably an very unfair way for their hosting of Wikimania to be seen to start off. Most unfortunate.
Thanks, Fae
(Sorry, the layout of my last mail was horrible, so here it is again, hopefully better to read:)
2015-10-04 17:42 GMT+02:00 Florence Devouard anthere9@yahoo.com:
Le 04/10/15 16:15, Theo10011 a écrit :
Now, beside head rolling... (uh, ouch :)) what do you suggest to fix that ?
I don't see that anything needs fixing here.
So, what happened? The Wikimania committee came to the conclusion that the current process to select the next Wikimania host is broken (and I think the committee was right about that). So something needed to happen - and the committee did something that we see not often enough in Wikimedia-land: they made a decision. A decision they were tasked to take: Think and decide on the next Wikimania host, and on the process to find one. Nobody ever said that their job was only to execute a set of old guidlines and processes (which, I guess, were never "community approved" but rather were around just for a long, long time).
So, they abandoned the process, came up with a new one, and decided who would host Wikimania in 2017 (Montreal seems a great choice, btw - I mean, a bilingual city has some great opportunities for us, right?).
Whats wrong with that? Nothing!
Let's face some truths here:
1. Wikimania has become well too big to be run by volunteers. EVERY Wikimania since Danzig (at least) happened only because the WMF jumped in at one point of time to rescue the whole event. That is not to say that volunteers did not do a great job for Wikimania - but the job proved to be too big for volunteers, for at least five times in a row. So it was right to abandon the current process and replace it with something new. 2. The new process has a lot of problems build in - I think, for example, that the decision to exclude major parts of the world from Wikimanias (except for every third year, when regions are "up to grabs), is wrong. BUT: We now have at least 18 MONTHS to fix this (and possible other problems) - thanks to the bold decision of the Wikimania committee. 3. "There are two things in the world you never want to let people see how you make 'em: laws and sausages" (Leo McGarry, The West Wing, "Five Votes Down"). And there is one thing Wikimedians in this world could not care less about: How the next host for Wikimania is found. Let's applaud the great people of the Wikimania Committee that they took on that task, came up with a great decision for 2017 AND implemented a new (even so not perfect) process while they were at it. 4. I think with a lot of things in Wikimedia-land, we need MORE bold decisions (by whomever), and LESS "community consultation" that only leads to some old-timers in en.WP and de.WP voice their anger and concerns, but rarely solves the problem that needs solving. 5. Dear Wikimania Committee: Your communication of this whole thing sucked, big time. Consider yourself scolded. Move on.
Cheers,
Pavel
[1]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Committee#Purpose_and_process
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Yes and no. Considering that I've been waiting for months for answers to
questions about the WMF Annual Plan, I would say that there is much room for improvement in communications.
On the other hand, the WMF Comms department itself seems to more or less ok, and I personally think we'll of WMF's chief communications officer.
So, some good points, and some room to improve. I agree that the status quo has been this way for awhile and it would be good to see across-the-board communications SLAs.
Pine On Oct 4, 2015 12:18 AM, "Mathias Damour" mathias.damour@laposte.net wrote:
Le 04/10/2015 05:36, Craig Franklin a écrit :
I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community"
seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet
there
doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see
here.
A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated
is
clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at
all.
I wouldn't say that the WMF communication is simply bad, it is pretty professional.
It may rather be that an open communication and keeping control on the greater part of the decisions (or even conducting the users of the
projets
themself, as an average internet company does), are "two tendancies that are not fully compatible" (to borrow Florence's words).
-- Mathias Damour [[User:Astirmays]]
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 4 October 2015 at 15:17, Mathias Damour mathias.damour@laposte.net wrote:
Le 04/10/2015 05:36, Craig Franklin a écrit :
I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community" seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet there doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see here. A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated is clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at all.
I wouldn't say that the WMF communication is simply bad, it is pretty professional.
The communication team are good, but this isnt the fault of the communication team but rather the Wikimania Committee. Its outright disgusting and heads should roll for the last ten-twelve years Wikimania bidding and process have been in one place on meta, and even now this place continue to imply that nothing has changed. A month before the whole process starts it get shelved in secret for a new process. The people involved on the Wikimania Committee know a bid starts months before the actual bidding process opens.
As for the process In returning to North America within two years, it will now be 2018 5 uears since it last was outside of these two regions before anywhere else will see the event, given its already been stated as SE Asia that also means that Africa, Middle East, Oceana, South America, the Sub continent and Eastern Europe will have to wait until 2021 for an opportunity even then only one will get that.
This doesnt create incentive for people to be involved with Wikimania planning , in fact it clearly states that if your outside of Europe or North America your really not part of our movement but we'll tolerate you to make us look like we care, and we're global in Europe. There was nothing wrong with the Wikimania process as it stood we all knew going that it takes a lot of energy, time and resources for potentially no return.... now there's nothing there's no incentive its going to be 6,9,12 years before other communities will be given some crumbs
It may rather be that an open communication and keeping control on the greater part of the decisions (or even conducting the users of the projets themself, as an average internet company does), are "two tendancies that are not fully compatible" (to borrow Florence's words).
-- Mathias Damour [[User:Astirmays]]
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I have to say I'm quite surprised by this as well. It seems a real departure from the norm and even though I've been told first hand that WMF would never choose Australia as a venue for a Wikimania due to cost (and the shift to a Europe/North America/elsewhere rotating format demonstrates this) but it's still very disheartening for those that have started preparing a bid only to find out it's a complete waste of their time.
Steve Crossin Sent from my iPhone
On 4 Oct 2015, at 2:13 PM, Craig Franklin cfranklin@halonetwork.net wrote:
You could excuse the Perth and Manila bid teams for being very angry at having wasted a lot of time and energy when the decision was apparently made behind closed doors weeks ago. Even if you think the idea of getting rid of the expensive bid process is a good idea (and I do), the way that this was not communicated to the community is simply abominable.
Cheers, Craig
On 4 October 2015 at 08:13, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a... _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
To be honest: I am not surprised at all.
Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized. They no longer care about the community, even if there is huge community consensus about something.
Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask the community.
I am disappointed
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 From: nawrich@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a... _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki steinsplitter-wiki@live.com wrote:
To be honest: I am not surprised at all.
Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized. They no longer care about the community, even if there is huge community consensus about something.
Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask the community.
While I agree it's important to sort things with the community (since that is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously suggesting that it's easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of people rather than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or otherwise?
Joe
I am disappointed
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 From: nawrich@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@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
Do you really believe the community consists of several 100.000 people? Am 06.10.2015 21:01 schrieb "Joseph Fox" josephfoxwiki@gmail.com:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki < steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> wrote:
To be honest: I am not surprised at all.
Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized. They no
longer
care about the community, even if there is huge community consensus about something.
Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask the
community.
While I agree it's important to sort things with the community (since that is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously suggesting that it's easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of people rather than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or otherwise?
Joe
I am disappointed
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 From: nawrich@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal
has
been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
If you want the views of everyone on every project... then yes, I do.
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 20:14 MF-Warburg mfwarburg@googlemail.com wrote:
Do you really believe the community consists of several 100.000 people? Am 06.10.2015 21:01 schrieb "Joseph Fox" josephfoxwiki@gmail.com:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki < steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> wrote:
To be honest: I am not surprised at all.
Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized. They no
longer
care about the community, even if there is huge community consensus
about
something.
Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask the
community.
While I agree it's important to sort things with the community (since
that
is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously suggesting that it's easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of people rather than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or otherwise?
Joe
I am disappointed
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 From: nawrich@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal
has
been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process
that
completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new
method
before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@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
A small poll on meta would be enough.
From: josephfoxwiki@gmail.com Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:14:59 +0000 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
If you want the views of everyone on every project... then yes, I do.
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 20:14 MF-Warburg mfwarburg@googlemail.com wrote:
Do you really believe the community consists of several 100.000 people? Am 06.10.2015 21:01 schrieb "Joseph Fox" josephfoxwiki@gmail.com:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki < steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> wrote:
To be honest: I am not surprised at all.
Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized. They no
longer
care about the community, even if there is huge community consensus
about
something.
Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask the
community.
While I agree it's important to sort things with the community (since
that
is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously suggesting that it's easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of people rather than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or otherwise?
Joe
I am disappointed
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 From: nawrich@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal
has
been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process
that
completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new
method
before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@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
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Steinsplitter, with respect (and I mean that!), I don't think a poll on meta would be enough. For something this big, either we get the views of the community as a whole - including those who don't read meta - or we come up with another way (eg a committee). A small poll on meta would not be representative enough.
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 7 October 2015 at 12:04, Steinsplitter Wiki steinsplitter-wiki@live.com wrote:
A small poll on meta would be enough.
From: josephfoxwiki@gmail.com Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:14:59 +0000 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
If you want the views of everyone on every project... then yes, I do.
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 20:14 MF-Warburg mfwarburg@googlemail.com wrote:
Do you really believe the community consists of several 100.000 people? Am 06.10.2015 21:01 schrieb "Joseph Fox" josephfoxwiki@gmail.com:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki < steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> wrote:
To be honest: I am not surprised at all.
Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized. They no
longer
care about the community, even if there is huge community consensus
about
something.
Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask the
community.
While I agree it's important to sort things with the community (since
that
is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously suggesting that
it's
easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of people
rather
than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or otherwise?
Joe
I am disappointed
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 From: nawrich@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that
Montreal
has
been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret
process
that
completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new
method
before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
You can post on VP that there is such a poll on :m:
Common sense.
From: richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 14:39:11 +0100 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
Steinsplitter, with respect (and I mean that!), I don't think a poll on meta would be enough. For something this big, either we get the views of the community as a whole - including those who don't read meta - or we come up with another way (eg a committee). A small poll on meta would not be representative enough.
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 7 October 2015 at 12:04, Steinsplitter Wiki steinsplitter-wiki@live.com wrote:
A small poll on meta would be enough.
From: josephfoxwiki@gmail.com Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:14:59 +0000 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
If you want the views of everyone on every project... then yes, I do.
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 20:14 MF-Warburg mfwarburg@googlemail.com wrote:
Do you really believe the community consists of several 100.000 people? Am 06.10.2015 21:01 schrieb "Joseph Fox" josephfoxwiki@gmail.com:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki < steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> wrote:
To be honest: I am not surprised at all.
Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized. They no
longer
care about the community, even if there is huge community consensus
about
something.
Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask the
community.
While I agree it's important to sort things with the community (since
that
is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously suggesting that
it's
easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of people
rather
than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or otherwise?
Joe
I am disappointed
> Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 > From: nawrich@gmail.com > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
> > Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that
Montreal
has
> been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret
process
that
> completed this past August. [1] > > It seems like the community could have been looped into this new
method
> before it was a done deal. > > ~Nathan > > [1] >
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
> _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
True, but not everyone reads the VP on each project: take Wikidata for example. There are a fair few people who don't read it at all! A mass message would be better, an email or banner to people better still - but it depends on who exactly you want the opinion of! "Community" is a big term :-)
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 7 October 2015 at 15:35, Steinsplitter Wiki steinsplitter-wiki@live.com wrote:
You can post on VP that there is such a poll on :m:
Common sense.
From: richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 14:39:11 +0100 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
Steinsplitter, with respect (and I mean that!), I don't think a poll on meta would be enough. For something this big, either we get the views of the community as a whole - including those who don't read meta - or we
come
up with another way (eg a committee). A small poll on meta would not be representative enough.
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A
4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 7 October 2015 at 12:04, Steinsplitter Wiki <
steinsplitter-wiki@live.com>
wrote:
A small poll on meta would be enough.
From: josephfoxwiki@gmail.com Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:14:59 +0000 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
If you want the views of everyone on every project... then yes, I do.
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 20:14 MF-Warburg mfwarburg@googlemail.com
wrote:
Do you really believe the community consists of several 100.000
people?
Am 06.10.2015 21:01 schrieb "Joseph Fox" <josephfoxwiki@gmail.com
:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki < steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> wrote:
> To be honest: I am not surprised at all. > > Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized.
They no
longer > care about the community, even if there is huge community
consensus
about
> something. > > Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask the community. >
While I agree it's important to sort things with the community
(since
that
is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously suggesting
that
it's
easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of people
rather
than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or otherwise?
Joe
> > I am disappointed > > > Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 > > From: nawrich@gmail.com > > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
> > > > Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that
Montreal
has > > been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret
process
that
> > completed this past August. [1] > > > > It seems like the community could have been looped into this
new
method
> > before it was a done deal. > > > > ~Nathan > > > > [1] > > >
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
> > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Are you familiar with Board elections? Those where seats are elected by the community?? Am 07.10.2015 16:41 schrieb "Richard Symonds" < richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk>:
True, but not everyone reads the VP on each project: take Wikidata for example. There are a fair few people who don't read it at all! A mass message would be better, an email or banner to people better still - but it depends on who exactly you want the opinion of! "Community" is a big term :-)
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 7 October 2015 at 15:35, Steinsplitter Wiki < steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> wrote:
You can post on VP that there is such a poll on :m:
Common sense.
From: richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 14:39:11 +0100 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
Steinsplitter, with respect (and I mean that!), I don't think a poll on meta would be enough. For something this big, either we get the views
of
the community as a whole - including those who don't read meta - or we
come
up with another way (eg a committee). A small poll on meta would not be representative enough.
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England
and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513.
Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A
4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation
(who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal
control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 7 October 2015 at 12:04, Steinsplitter Wiki <
steinsplitter-wiki@live.com>
wrote:
A small poll on meta would be enough.
From: josephfoxwiki@gmail.com Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:14:59 +0000 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
If you want the views of everyone on every project... then yes, I
do.
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 20:14 MF-Warburg mfwarburg@googlemail.com
wrote:
Do you really believe the community consists of several 100.000
people?
Am 06.10.2015 21:01 schrieb "Joseph Fox" <
josephfoxwiki@gmail.com
:
> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki < > steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> > wrote: > > > To be honest: I am not surprised at all. > > > > Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized.
They no
> longer > > care about the community, even if there is huge community
consensus
about > > something. > > > > Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask
the
> community. > > > > While I agree it's important to sort things with the community
(since
that > is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously suggesting
that
it's
> easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of
people
rather
> than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or
otherwise?
> > Joe > > > > > > I am disappointed > > > > > Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 > > > From: nawrich@gmail.com > > > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
> > > > > > Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing
that
Montreal
> has > > > been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret
process
that > > > completed this past August. [1] > > > > > > It seems like the community could have been looped into
this
new
method > > > before it was a done deal. > > > > > > ~Nathan > > > > > > [1] > > > > > >
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
> > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > < >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
> > > > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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.
I feel this conversation is getting somewhat tangled at this point.
Joe
On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 at 15:48 MF-Warburg mfwarburg@googlemail.com wrote:
Are you familiar with Board elections? Those where seats are elected by the community?? Am 07.10.2015 16:41 schrieb "Richard Symonds" < richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk>:
True, but not everyone reads the VP on each project: take Wikidata for example. There are a fair few people who don't read it at all! A mass message would be better, an email or banner to people better still - but
it
depends on who exactly you want the opinion of! "Community" is a big term :-)
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A
4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 7 October 2015 at 15:35, Steinsplitter Wiki < steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> wrote:
You can post on VP that there is such a poll on :m:
Common sense.
From: richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 14:39:11 +0100 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
Steinsplitter, with respect (and I mean that!), I don't think a poll
on
meta would be enough. For something this big, either we get the views
of
the community as a whole - including those who don't read meta - or
we
come
up with another way (eg a committee). A small poll on meta would not
be
representative enough.
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England
and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513.
Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London
EC2A
4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation
(who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal
control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 7 October 2015 at 12:04, Steinsplitter Wiki <
steinsplitter-wiki@live.com>
wrote:
A small poll on meta would be enough.
From: josephfoxwiki@gmail.com Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:14:59 +0000 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
If you want the views of everyone on every project... then yes, I
do.
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 20:14 MF-Warburg <mfwarburg@googlemail.com
wrote:
> Do you really believe the community consists of several 100.000
people?
> Am 06.10.2015 21:01 schrieb "Joseph Fox" <
josephfoxwiki@gmail.com
:
> > > On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki < > > steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> > > wrote: > > > > > To be honest: I am not surprised at all. > > > > > > Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized.
They no
> > longer > > > care about the community, even if there is huge community
consensus
> about > > > something. > > > > > > Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask
the
> > community. > > > > > > > While I agree it's important to sort things with the
community
(since
> that > > is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously
suggesting
that
it's
> > easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of
people
rather
> > than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or
otherwise?
> > > > Joe > > > > > > > > > > I am disappointed > > > > > > > Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 > > > > From: nawrich@gmail.com > > > > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped
by
Signpost
> > > > > > > > Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing
that
Montreal
> > has > > > > been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a
secret
process
> that > > > > completed this past August. [1] > > > > > > > > It seems like the community could have been looped into
this
new
> method > > > > before it was a done deal. > > > > > > > > ~Nathan > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > >
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > < > > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@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
On 7 October 2015 at 22:54, Joseph Fox josephfoxwiki@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
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@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 October 2015 at 22:54, Joseph Fox josephfoxwiki@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@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
Hoi, You may, but you will only get a subset of the people who have an opinion going there. Common sense also dictates that you have to see the limit of what you propose in the sense of who you will reach.
I for one read this thread and will not go to Meta. Thanks, GerardM
On 7 October 2015 at 16:35, Steinsplitter Wiki steinsplitter-wiki@live.com wrote:
You can post on VP that there is such a poll on :m:
Common sense.
From: richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 14:39:11 +0100 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
Steinsplitter, with respect (and I mean that!), I don't think a poll on meta would be enough. For something this big, either we get the views of the community as a whole - including those who don't read meta - or we
come
up with another way (eg a committee). A small poll on meta would not be representative enough.
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A
4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 7 October 2015 at 12:04, Steinsplitter Wiki <
steinsplitter-wiki@live.com>
wrote:
A small poll on meta would be enough.
From: josephfoxwiki@gmail.com Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:14:59 +0000 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
If you want the views of everyone on every project... then yes, I do.
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 20:14 MF-Warburg mfwarburg@googlemail.com
wrote:
Do you really believe the community consists of several 100.000
people?
Am 06.10.2015 21:01 schrieb "Joseph Fox" <josephfoxwiki@gmail.com
:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki < steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> wrote:
> To be honest: I am not surprised at all. > > Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized.
They no
longer > care about the community, even if there is huge community
consensus
about
> something. > > Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask the community. >
While I agree it's important to sort things with the community
(since
that
is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously suggesting
that
it's
easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of people
rather
than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or otherwise?
Joe
> > I am disappointed > > > Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 > > From: nawrich@gmail.com > > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by
Signpost
> > > > Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that
Montreal
has > > been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret
process
that
> > completed this past August. [1] > > > > It seems like the community could have been looped into this
new
method
> > before it was a done deal. > > > > ~Nathan > > > > [1] > > >
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
> > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Given that enWP alone has 123,540 active editors as of this morning,[1] it’s not exactly a stretch…
-greg
[1]: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias
On Oct 6, 2015, at 3:14 PM, MF-Warburg mfwarburg@googlemail.com wrote:
Do you really believe the community consists of several 100.000 people? Am 06.10.2015 21:01 schrieb "Joseph Fox" josephfoxwiki@gmail.com:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 17:27 Steinsplitter Wiki < steinsplitter-wiki@live.com> wrote:
To be honest: I am not surprised at all.
Wikimedia Foundation is becoming moor and moor centralized. They no
longer
care about the community, even if there is huge community consensus about something.
Why is there a secret committee needed? It is easier to ask the
community.
While I agree it's important to sort things with the community (since that is the lifeblood of the projects), are you seriously suggesting that it's easier to gauge the consensus of hundreds of thousands of people rather than make a decision in a smaller committee, secret or otherwise?
Joe
I am disappointed
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:13 -0400 From: nawrich@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost
Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal
has
been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1]
It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal.
~Nathan
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-09-30/News_a...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Gregory Varnum gregory.varnum@gmail.com wrote:
Given that enWP alone has 123,540 active editors as of this morning,[1] it’s not exactly a stretch…
What percentage of those are credible stakeholders in Wikimania?
How many are going to be eligible for Wikimania scholarships?
How many will attend a Wikimania?
Obviously a relative constant percentage will be attendees due to it being very affordable to attend from their home. This is an argument for ensuring the host cities are very geographically diverse, but factoring in the size of the 'casual' editor community who is likely to attend for this reason.
So, probably the most important question, depending on whether Wikimania is to be a community event (which is up for debate)...
How many would fly to another country at their own expense to attend Wikimania?
-- John Vandenberg
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org