Hi folks,
Just letting you know that I’m reading the recent Wikimania-focused mailing list threads with interest, as the Community Resources team is now on-point for funding and coordinating WMF’s involvement in Wikimania.
A couple of first thoughts to share:
1. WMF has learned from past Wikimanias that we need to do our due-diligence on venue etc before the host team and location is announced. One reason for this is that we have a limited budget for Wikimania, and doing a site visit before the host is finalized helps us ensure that we’re able to support the costs of the event in a given location. Ellie Young is headed to Montreal in 2 weeks and based on what she learns from that visit, we’re aiming to give the steering committee what they need to confirm selection before the end of 2015. That said, we recognize that communications around this haven’t gone as planned, and we are looking into improvements…(see thought 2)
2. We, too, would like to see the movement building towards a shared vision of Wikimania! It is great to see so many people, in true Wikimedian-style, thinking about big-picture questions of participation, representation, and content at Wikimania. Knowing that mailing list discussions have their limits, here’s how my team is thinking about collecting feedback more systematically for this going forward:
We’ll be launching a community consultation in November to help build towards more shared vision and process improvements for Wikimania 2018 - 2021. Two key inputs we’ve been thinking about using to launch that conversation are 1) responses from the survey of last Wikimania’s attendees and 2) the steering committee’s recommendation for host selection going forward.
We’re still regrouping from the latest Resources Consultation, and will begin planning for a Wikimania Consultation next week, so after that we’ll be able to share more information about what this consultation will look like and the exact timeline. Meanwhile, suggestions and open questions that you’d like to see resolved via this consultation are most welcome in this thread. My hope is that a consultation will help broaden participation in these conversations and get us from input to action.
Warm regards, Siko
Hi Siko
El 06/10/2015 a las 01:11 a.m., Siko Bouterse escribió:
Hi folks,
Just letting you know that I’m reading the recent Wikimania-focused mailing list threads with interest, as the Community Resources team is now on-point for funding and coordinating WMF’s involvement in Wikimania.
A couple of first thoughts to share:
- WMF has learned from past Wikimanias that we need to do our
due-diligence on venue etc before the host team and location is announced. One reason for this is that we have a limited budget for Wikimania, and doing a site visit before the host is finalized helps us ensure that we’re able to support the costs of the event in a given location. Ellie Young is headed to Montreal in 2 weeks and based on what she learns from that visit, we’re aiming to give the steering committee what they need to confirm selection before the end of 2015.
Seriously? But the committee seems to have already taken a decision as early as August, with the e-announcement mail scheduled to be sent sometime in October
///
/Wikimania Committee meeting/
2015-08-21, 16:00 UTC / 09:00 PDT DECISION: Committee happy to endorse Montréal as a great choice for 2017. /
/ /
/Venue//////: wikimedia-l, wikimania-l/
/Audience////: Prospective Wikimania attendees, and other interested Wikimedians/
/What//////: Announce 2017 venue/
/When//////: ~ October 2015/
/From//////: James F. as Chair, o/b/o the Wikimania Committee/
/Subject////: //Wikimania 2017 to be held in Montréal in Canada/
/All,/
/I am delighted to announce on behalf of the Wikimania Committee that Wikimania, the annual Wikimedia community conference, will be held for 2017 in Montréal in Canada; congratulations. /
That said, we recognize that communications around this haven’t gone as planned,
Sort of.
and we are looking into improvements…(see thought 2)
- We, too, would like to see the movement building towards a shared vision
of Wikimania! It is great to see so many people, in true Wikimedian-style, thinking about big-picture questions of participation, representation, and content at Wikimania. Knowing that mailing list discussions have their limits, here’s how my team is thinking about collecting feedback more systematically for this going forward:
We’ll be launching a community consultation in November to help build towards more shared vision and process improvements for Wikimania 2018 - 2021. Two key inputs we’ve been thinking about using to launch that conversation are 1) responses from the survey of last Wikimania’s attendees and 2) the steering committee’s recommendation for host selection going forward.
We’re still regrouping from the latest Resources Consultation, and will begin planning for a Wikimania Consultation next week, so after that we’ll be able to share more information about what this consultation will look like and the exact timeline. Meanwhile, suggestions and open questions that you’d like to see resolved via this consultation are most welcome in this thread. My hope is that a consultation will help broaden participation in these conversations and get us from input to action.
The problem here is that even if the reasoning for deciding behind closed doors the host for Wikimania 2017 was 100% valid, the way it was done, planning everything as early as August and planning when to release information to the people to make it seem transparent (as the WMF expects from all wikimedians), the way how it was handled lacked ethics and the way the WMF seems to react ("yeah well, we think we screwed it, let's move forward") happens again and again, and the movement receives always the same poor excuses.
Warm regards, Siko
All:
Based on a number of the posts in this thread, I think a few points are worth underscoring.
1. The Wikimania Jury (historical -- and for what it's worth, I was a member) and Wikimania Committee (present) have never had a strong mandate. Its recommendations have generally been accepted by the Wikimedia community and the Wikimedia Foundation. 2. While it's possible the Wikimania Committee made what it *originally intended* to be a final and binding decision, there is nothing preventing the committee from revisiting its decision. 3. As evident in Siko's post, the WMF does not yet regard the Montreal decision as final, and does not expect to reach such a decision before the end of 2015.
Siko's message aligns with the long-published timeline for venue selection.[1]
For comparison, past decisions have been made as late as March or April. There is still A LOT of time to make a final decision.
I'd suggest that anybody deeply dissatisfied with either the process or proposed decision of the Wikimania Committee simply devote their efforts to supporting an alternative bid (Perth, Manila, or elsewhere; the original timeline still allows plenty of time for even *submitting* a bid). The Wikimedia Foundation has a good deal of influence over legitimizing the choice of a private group.
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2017_bids
In short, there is no emergency here; rather, there's lots of opportunity to come up with alternative venue options and alternative process proposals.
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Carlos M. Colina maorx@wikimedia.org.ve wrote:
Hi Siko
El 06/10/2015 a las 01:11 a.m., Siko Bouterse escribió:
Hi folks,
Just letting you know that I’m reading the recent Wikimania-focused mailing list threads with interest, as the Community Resources team is now on-point for funding and coordinating WMF’s involvement in Wikimania.
A couple of first thoughts to share:
- WMF has learned from past Wikimanias that we need to do our
due-diligence on venue etc before the host team and location is announced. One reason for this is that we have a limited budget for Wikimania, and doing a site visit before the host is finalized helps us ensure that we’re able to support the costs of the event in a given location. Ellie Young is headed to Montreal in 2 weeks and based on what she learns from that visit, we’re aiming to give the steering committee what they need to confirm selection before the end of 2015.
Seriously? But the committee seems to have already taken a decision as early as August, with the e-announcement mail scheduled to be sent sometime in October
///
/Wikimania Committee meeting/
2015-08-21, 16:00 UTC / 09:00 PDT DECISION: Committee happy to endorse Montréal as a great choice for 2017. /
/ /
/Venue//////: wikimedia-l, wikimania-l/
/Audience////: Prospective Wikimania attendees, and other interested Wikimedians/
/What//////: Announce 2017 venue/
/When//////: ~ October 2015/
/From//////: James F. as Chair, o/b/o the Wikimania Committee/
/Subject////: //Wikimania 2017 to be held in Montréal in Canada/
/All,/
/I am delighted to announce on behalf of the Wikimania Committee that Wikimania, the annual Wikimedia community conference, will be held for 2017 in Montréal in Canada; congratulations. /
That said, we recognize that
communications around this haven’t gone as planned,
Sort of.
and we are looking into improvements…(see thought 2)
- We, too, would like to see the movement building towards a shared
vision of Wikimania! It is great to see so many people, in true Wikimedian-style, thinking about big-picture questions of participation, representation, and content at Wikimania. Knowing that mailing list discussions have their limits, here’s how my team is thinking about collecting feedback more systematically for this going forward:
We’ll be launching a community consultation in November to help build towards more shared vision and process improvements for Wikimania 2018 - 2021. Two key inputs we’ve been thinking about using to launch that conversation are 1) responses from the survey of last Wikimania’s attendees and 2) the steering committee’s recommendation for host selection going forward.
We’re still regrouping from the latest Resources Consultation, and will begin planning for a Wikimania Consultation next week, so after that we’ll be able to share more information about what this consultation will look like and the exact timeline. Meanwhile, suggestions and open questions that you’d like to see resolved via this consultation are most welcome in this thread. My hope is that a consultation will help broaden participation in these conversations and get us from input to action.
The problem here is that even if the reasoning for deciding behind closed doors the host for Wikimania 2017 was 100% valid, the way it was done, planning everything as early as August and planning when to release information to the people to make it seem transparent (as the WMF expects from all wikimedians), the way how it was handled lacked ethics and the way the WMF seems to react ("yeah well, we think we screwed it, let's move forward") happens again and again, and the movement receives always the same poor excuses.
Warm regards, Siko
-- "*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
interesting suggestions Pete but the published timeline is based on the published process which has now been marked as obsolete/historical. We also know none of that process had been followed nor was there any intention to follow that process. Are you seriously suggesting people continue to put time and effort into the bids and ask people outside of the movement to also make effort, without any leadership from WMF that there is even any value in it.
Lets look at the possible outcomes how they will perceived if Montreal 2017 is not followed through with;
- Montreal still wins - it was already decided the process was token gesture to effort of the others but it was never going to be anything but - Perth , Manila, or Bali - who ever wins will be seen as the most vocal opponent to process and being awarded 2017 was an appeasement not a genuine best contender - another city not yet in the pool - went there to stop all the arguments, a spiteful decision by those involve in the original decision because of the backlash from the bidders who followed the published processes
It really doesnt matter how a solution is proposed the way events have occurred it has poisoned every selection outcome option, the best way forward is for WMF to just accept Montreal and then put effort into restoring community faith in the Wikimania processes and repairing the damage done to those communities who acted in good faith following the process laid down and refined by the community over the last 10 years.
On 6 October 2015 at 22:47, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
All:
Based on a number of the posts in this thread, I think a few points are worth underscoring.
- The Wikimania Jury (historical -- and for what it's worth, I was a
member) and Wikimania Committee (present) have never had a strong mandate. Its recommendations have generally been accepted by the Wikimedia community and the Wikimedia Foundation. 2. While it's possible the Wikimania Committee made what it *originally intended* to be a final and binding decision, there is nothing preventing the committee from revisiting its decision. 3. As evident in Siko's post, the WMF does not yet regard the Montreal decision as final, and does not expect to reach such a decision before the end of 2015.
Siko's message aligns with the long-published timeline for venue selection.[1]
For comparison, past decisions have been made as late as March or April. There is still A LOT of time to make a final decision.
I'd suggest that anybody deeply dissatisfied with either the process or proposed decision of the Wikimania Committee simply devote their efforts to supporting an alternative bid (Perth, Manila, or elsewhere; the original timeline still allows plenty of time for even *submitting* a bid). The Wikimedia Foundation has a good deal of influence over legitimizing the choice of a private group.
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2017_bids
In short, there is no emergency here; rather, there's lots of opportunity to come up with alternative venue options and alternative process proposals.
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Carlos M. Colina maorx@wikimedia.org.ve wrote:
Hi Siko
El 06/10/2015 a las 01:11 a.m., Siko Bouterse escribió:
Hi folks,
Just letting you know that I’m reading the recent Wikimania-focused mailing list threads with interest, as the Community Resources team is now on-point for funding and coordinating WMF’s involvement in Wikimania.
A couple of first thoughts to share:
- WMF has learned from past Wikimanias that we need to do our
due-diligence on venue etc before the host team and location is
announced.
One reason for this is that we have a limited budget for Wikimania, and doing a site visit before the host is finalized helps us ensure that
we’re
able to support the costs of the event in a given location. Ellie Young
is
headed to Montreal in 2 weeks and based on what she learns from that visit, we’re aiming to give the steering committee what they need to confirm selection before the end of 2015.
Seriously? But the committee seems to have already taken a decision as early as August, with the e-announcement mail scheduled to be sent
sometime
in October
///
/Wikimania Committee meeting/
2015-08-21, 16:00 UTC / 09:00 PDT DECISION: Committee happy to endorse Montréal as a great choice for 2017. /
/ /
/Venue//////: wikimedia-l, wikimania-l/
/Audience////: Prospective Wikimania attendees, and other interested Wikimedians/
/What//////: Announce 2017 venue/
/When//////: ~ October 2015/
/From//////: James F. as Chair, o/b/o the Wikimania Committee/
/Subject////: //Wikimania 2017 to be held in Montréal in Canada/
/All,/
/I am delighted to announce on behalf of the Wikimania Committee that Wikimania, the annual Wikimedia community conference, will be held for 2017 in Montréal in Canada; congratulations. /
That said, we recognize that
communications around this haven’t gone as planned,
Sort of.
and we are looking into improvements…(see thought 2)
- We, too, would like to see the movement building towards a shared
vision of Wikimania! It is great to see so many people, in true
Wikimedian-style,
thinking about big-picture questions of participation, representation,
and
content at Wikimania. Knowing that mailing list discussions have their limits, here’s how my team is thinking about collecting feedback more systematically for this going forward:
We’ll be launching a community consultation in November to help build towards more shared vision and process improvements for Wikimania 2018 - 2021. Two key inputs we’ve been thinking about using to launch that conversation are 1) responses from the survey of last Wikimania’s attendees and 2) the steering committee’s recommendation for host selection going forward.
We’re still regrouping from the latest Resources Consultation, and will begin planning for a Wikimania Consultation next week, so after that
we’ll
be able to share more information about what this consultation will look like and the exact timeline. Meanwhile, suggestions and open questions that you’d like to see resolved via this consultation are most welcome in
this
thread. My hope is that a consultation will help broaden participation
in
these conversations and get us from input to action.
The problem here is that even if the reasoning for deciding behind closed doors the host for Wikimania 2017 was 100% valid, the way it was done, planning everything as early as August and planning when to release information to the people to make it seem transparent (as the WMF expects from all wikimedians), the way how it was handled lacked ethics and the
way
the WMF seems to react ("yeah well, we think we screwed it, let's move forward") happens again and again, and the movement receives always the same poor excuses.
Warm regards, Siko
-- "*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
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
Gnangarra, you're attaching a great deal of significance to a small detail in a complex situation. But please do look at the broader picture:
- The chair of the Wikimania Committee has acknowledged that the Montreal selection is not confirmed.[1] - The supervisor of the committee's WMF representative has asserted the selection is not confirmed, and made assertions that match the original published timeline. (start of this thread) - The committee's/jury's *recommendations* (and they really have never been anything more) have been followed in the past; but there has never *yet *been a viable alternative recommendation.
When I was a member of the Wikimania Jury, it was pretty well acknowledged within the jury that the setup was far from ideal, and should ideally have a stronger mandate and a more transparent processes. The problem has long been broadly acknowledged; it's not terribly controversial, but it will take effort to make an improvement.
It seems that with the establishment of the Wikimania Committee, an effort has been made to fix the basic problems; from what I've read here, that effort has not (yet?) been successful, meaning that more work is needed.
The only way the Wikimania Committee's recommendation will be unopposed is it is accepted by those in a position to offer an alternative. There is LOTS OF TIME to offer an alternative, if you or anybody else wants to start offering suggestions for how to do so.
If you think the best way forward is for everybody involved to accept the Montreal recommendation *months before WMF will do so*, OK. That seems like a strange conclusion, but I don't really have any stake in where Wikimania is held, so you'll get no argument from me. But I do think anybody who disagrees with you and the Wikimania Committee should not hesitate to work toward a viable alternative. There's still plenty of time.
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/13980522
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
interesting suggestions Pete but the published timeline is based on the published process which has now been marked as obsolete/historical. We also know none of that process had been followed nor was there any intention to follow that process. Are you seriously suggesting people continue to put time and effort into the bids and ask people outside of the movement to also make effort, without any leadership from WMF that there is even any value in it.
Lets look at the possible outcomes how they will perceived if Montreal 2017 is not followed through with;
- Montreal still wins - it was already decided the process was token
gesture to effort of the others but it was never going to be anything but
- Perth , Manila, or Bali - who ever wins will be seen as the most vocal
opponent to process and being awarded 2017 was an appeasement not a genuine best contender
- another city not yet in the pool - went there to stop all the
arguments, a spiteful decision by those involve in the original decision because of the backlash from the bidders who followed the published processes
It really doesnt matter how a solution is proposed the way events have occurred it has poisoned every selection outcome option, the best way forward is for WMF to just accept Montreal and then put effort into restoring community faith in the Wikimania processes and repairing the damage done to those communities who acted in good faith following the process laid down and refined by the community over the last 10 years.
On 6 October 2015 at 22:47, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
All:
Based on a number of the posts in this thread, I think a few points are worth underscoring.
- The Wikimania Jury (historical -- and for what it's worth, I was a
member) and Wikimania Committee (present) have never had a strong mandate. Its recommendations have generally been accepted by the Wikimedia community and the Wikimedia Foundation. 2. While it's possible the Wikimania Committee made what it
*originally
intended* to be a final and binding decision, there is nothing preventing the committee from revisiting its decision. 3. As evident in Siko's post, the WMF does not yet regard the Montreal decision as final, and does not expect to reach such a decision before the end of 2015.
Siko's message aligns with the long-published timeline for venue selection.[1]
For comparison, past decisions have been made as late as March or April. There is still A LOT of time to make a final decision.
I'd suggest that anybody deeply dissatisfied with either the process or proposed decision of the Wikimania Committee simply devote their efforts
to
supporting an alternative bid (Perth, Manila, or elsewhere; the original timeline still allows plenty of time for even *submitting* a bid). The Wikimedia Foundation has a good deal of influence over legitimizing the choice of a private group.
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2017_bids
In short, there is no emergency here; rather, there's lots of opportunity to come up with alternative venue options and alternative process proposals.
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Carlos M. Colina <
maorx@wikimedia.org.ve>
wrote:
Hi Siko
El 06/10/2015 a las 01:11 a.m., Siko Bouterse escribió:
Hi folks,
Just letting you know that I’m reading the recent Wikimania-focused mailing list threads with interest, as the Community Resources team is now on-point for funding and coordinating WMF’s involvement in Wikimania.
A couple of first thoughts to share:
- WMF has learned from past Wikimanias that we need to do our
due-diligence on venue etc before the host team and location is
announced.
One reason for this is that we have a limited budget for Wikimania,
and
doing a site visit before the host is finalized helps us ensure that
we’re
able to support the costs of the event in a given location. Ellie
Young
is
headed to Montreal in 2 weeks and based on what she learns from that visit, we’re aiming to give the steering committee what they need to confirm selection before the end of 2015.
Seriously? But the committee seems to have already taken a decision as early as August, with the e-announcement mail scheduled to be sent
sometime
in October
///
/Wikimania Committee meeting/
2015-08-21, 16:00 UTC / 09:00 PDT DECISION: Committee happy to endorse Montréal as a great choice for 2017. /
/ /
/Venue//////: wikimedia-l, wikimania-l/
/Audience////: Prospective Wikimania attendees, and other interested Wikimedians/
/What//////: Announce 2017 venue/
/When//////: ~ October 2015/
/From//////: James F. as Chair, o/b/o the Wikimania Committee/
/Subject////: //Wikimania 2017 to be held in Montréal in Canada/
/All,/
/I am delighted to announce on behalf of the Wikimania Committee that Wikimania, the annual Wikimedia community conference, will be held for 2017 in Montréal in Canada; congratulations. /
That said, we recognize that
communications around this haven’t gone as planned,
Sort of.
and we are looking into improvements…(see thought 2)
- We, too, would like to see the movement building towards a shared
vision of Wikimania! It is great to see so many people, in true
Wikimedian-style,
thinking about big-picture questions of participation, representation,
and
content at Wikimania. Knowing that mailing list discussions have their limits, here’s how my team is thinking about collecting feedback more systematically for this going forward:
We’ll be launching a community consultation in November to help build towards more shared vision and process improvements for Wikimania
2018 -
- Two key inputs we’ve been thinking about using to launch that
conversation are 1) responses from the survey of last Wikimania’s attendees and 2) the steering committee’s recommendation for host selection
going
forward.
We’re still regrouping from the latest Resources Consultation, and
will
begin planning for a Wikimania Consultation next week, so after that
we’ll
be able to share more information about what this consultation will
look
like and the exact timeline. Meanwhile, suggestions and open questions that you’d like to see resolved via this consultation are most welcome in
this
thread. My hope is that a consultation will help broaden participation
in
these conversations and get us from input to action.
The problem here is that even if the reasoning for deciding behind
closed
doors the host for Wikimania 2017 was 100% valid, the way it was done, planning everything as early as August and planning when to release information to the people to make it seem transparent (as the WMF
expects
from all wikimedians), the way how it was handled lacked ethics and the
way
the WMF seems to react ("yeah well, we think we screwed it, let's move forward") happens again and again, and the movement receives always the same poor excuses.
Warm regards, Siko
-- "*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
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
-- GN. Vice President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ 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
Hello,
We already knew about Montreal (and the hint for cruise ship) [1] before putting Bali on Meta. Nevertheless, we did so and moved on to contact and meet with vendors, venues, etc; simply because it's an active meta page for Wikimania 2017 bids, there's a somewhat obvious bidding timeline and the so called bidding was not officially started, Montreal was not even listed on the page, and most importantly no official announcement whatsoever from the committee about any other non-bidding process. We also asked @wikimedia about the updates, and of course they told us to check Meta page. Like we always (suppose to) do.
Interestingly, it's not official yet for Montreal [2], but seems like there's nothing we can do about 2017 now because community discussion is expected to focus on 2018-2021. Either way, we are paying attention!
Cheers, Isabella
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Committee/2015-07-16 [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?diff=13980522
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 2:50 AM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
Gnangarra, you're attaching a great deal of significance to a small detail in a complex situation. But please do look at the broader picture:
- The chair of the Wikimania Committee has acknowledged that the
Montreal selection is not confirmed.[1]
- The supervisor of the committee's WMF representative has asserted the
selection is not confirmed, and made assertions that match the original published timeline. (start of this thread)
- The committee's/jury's *recommendations* (and they really have never
been anything more) have been followed in the past; but there has never *yet *been a viable alternative recommendation.
When I was a member of the Wikimania Jury, it was pretty well acknowledged within the jury that the setup was far from ideal, and should ideally have a stronger mandate and a more transparent processes. The problem has long been broadly acknowledged; it's not terribly controversial, but it will take effort to make an improvement.
It seems that with the establishment of the Wikimania Committee, an effort has been made to fix the basic problems; from what I've read here, that effort has not (yet?) been successful, meaning that more work is needed.
The only way the Wikimania Committee's recommendation will be unopposed is it is accepted by those in a position to offer an alternative. There is LOTS OF TIME to offer an alternative, if you or anybody else wants to start offering suggestions for how to do so.
If you think the best way forward is for everybody involved to accept the Montreal recommendation *months before WMF will do so*, OK. That seems like a strange conclusion, but I don't really have any stake in where Wikimania is held, so you'll get no argument from me. But I do think anybody who disagrees with you and the Wikimania Committee should not hesitate to work toward a viable alternative. There's still plenty of time.
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/13980522
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
interesting suggestions Pete but the published timeline is based on the published process which has now been marked as obsolete/historical. We
also
know none of that process had been followed nor was there any intention
to
follow that process. Are you seriously suggesting people continue to put time and effort into the bids and ask people outside of the movement to also make effort, without any leadership from WMF that there is even any value in it.
Lets look at the possible outcomes how they will perceived if Montreal
2017
is not followed through with;
- Montreal still wins - it was already decided the process was token
gesture to effort of the others but it was never going to be anything but
- Perth , Manila, or Bali - who ever wins will be seen as the most
vocal
opponent to process and being awarded 2017 was an appeasement not a genuine best contender
- another city not yet in the pool - went there to stop all the
arguments, a spiteful decision by those involve in the original
decision
because of the backlash from the bidders who followed the published processes
It really doesnt matter how a solution is proposed the way events have occurred it has poisoned every selection outcome option, the best way forward is for WMF to just accept Montreal and then put effort into restoring community faith in the Wikimania processes and repairing the damage done to those communities who acted in good faith following the process laid down and refined by the community over the last 10 years.
On 6 October 2015 at 22:47, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
All:
Based on a number of the posts in this thread, I think a few points are worth underscoring.
- The Wikimania Jury (historical -- and for what it's worth, I was
a
member) and Wikimania Committee (present) have never had a strong mandate. Its recommendations have generally been accepted by the Wikimedia community and the Wikimedia Foundation. 2. While it's possible the Wikimania Committee made what it
*originally
intended* to be a final and binding decision, there is nothing preventing the committee from revisiting its decision. 3. As evident in Siko's post, the WMF does not yet regard the
Montreal
decision as final, and does not expect to reach such a decision
before
the end of 2015.
Siko's message aligns with the long-published timeline for venue selection.[1]
For comparison, past decisions have been made as late as March or
April.
There is still A LOT of time to make a final decision.
I'd suggest that anybody deeply dissatisfied with either the process or proposed decision of the Wikimania Committee simply devote their
efforts
to
supporting an alternative bid (Perth, Manila, or elsewhere; the
original
timeline still allows plenty of time for even *submitting* a bid). The Wikimedia Foundation has a good deal of influence over legitimizing the choice of a private group.
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2017_bids
In short, there is no emergency here; rather, there's lots of
opportunity
to come up with alternative venue options and alternative process proposals.
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Carlos M. Colina <
maorx@wikimedia.org.ve>
wrote:
Hi Siko
El 06/10/2015 a las 01:11 a.m., Siko Bouterse escribió:
Hi folks,
Just letting you know that I’m reading the recent Wikimania-focused mailing list threads with interest, as the Community Resources team is now on-point for funding and coordinating WMF’s involvement in Wikimania.
A couple of first thoughts to share:
- WMF has learned from past Wikimanias that we need to do our
due-diligence on venue etc before the host team and location is
announced.
One reason for this is that we have a limited budget for Wikimania,
and
doing a site visit before the host is finalized helps us ensure that
we’re
able to support the costs of the event in a given location. Ellie
Young
is
headed to Montreal in 2 weeks and based on what she learns from that visit, we’re aiming to give the steering committee what they need to
confirm
selection before the end of 2015.
Seriously? But the committee seems to have already taken a decision
as
early as August, with the e-announcement mail scheduled to be sent
sometime
in October
///
/Wikimania Committee meeting/
2015-08-21, 16:00 UTC / 09:00 PDT DECISION: Committee happy to endorse Montréal as a great choice
for
- /
/ /
/Venue//////: wikimedia-l, wikimania-l/
/Audience////: Prospective Wikimania attendees, and other
interested
Wikimedians/
/What//////: Announce 2017 venue/
/When//////: ~ October 2015/
/From//////: James F. as Chair, o/b/o the Wikimania Committee/
/Subject////: //Wikimania 2017 to be held in Montréal in Canada/
/All,/
/I am delighted to announce on behalf of the Wikimania Committee that Wikimania, the annual Wikimedia community conference, will be held for 2017 in Montréal in Canada; congratulations. /
That said, we recognize that
communications around this haven’t gone as planned,
Sort of.
and we are looking into improvements…(see thought 2)
- We, too, would like to see the movement building towards a shared
vision of Wikimania! It is great to see so many people, in true
Wikimedian-style,
thinking about big-picture questions of participation,
representation,
and
content at Wikimania. Knowing that mailing list discussions have
their
limits, here’s how my team is thinking about collecting feedback
more
systematically for this going forward:
We’ll be launching a community consultation in November to help
build
towards more shared vision and process improvements for Wikimania
2018 -
- Two key inputs we’ve been thinking about using to launch that
conversation are 1) responses from the survey of last Wikimania’s attendees and 2) the steering committee’s recommendation for host selection
going
forward.
We’re still regrouping from the latest Resources Consultation, and
will
begin planning for a Wikimania Consultation next week, so after that
we’ll
be able to share more information about what this consultation will
look
like and the exact timeline. Meanwhile, suggestions and open
questions
that you’d like to see resolved via this consultation are most welcome in
this
thread. My hope is that a consultation will help broaden
participation
in
these conversations and get us from input to action.
The problem here is that even if the reasoning for deciding behind
closed
doors the host for Wikimania 2017 was 100% valid, the way it was
done,
planning everything as early as August and planning when to release information to the people to make it seem transparent (as the WMF
expects
from all wikimedians), the way how it was handled lacked ethics and
the
way
the WMF seems to react ("yeah well, we think we screwed it, let's
move
forward") happens again and again, and the movement receives always
the
same poor excuses.
Warm regards, Siko
-- "*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
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
-- GN. Vice President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ 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
Hi Siko,
Thanks for the constructive thoughts.
I agree it is good to focus on the future, and have a good discussion about this. I hope that chapters and organised groups (who could have higher odds for bidding/hosting) also discuss this topic, and use that as input. That way, more people can be included indirectly.
While I do think we should really discuss this, I do also think Esino Lario is a very brave experiment, and I would like to separate the discussion between general goals, and how we accomplish them. I expect we will learn many lessons from Esino Lario based on the very creative approach to the conference. Some things will work out great, and should be repeated, others probably give a less enthusiast feeling for repetition. That is nothing to be ashamed of, because if we never try, we never find out.
So I would like to propose that this consultation does /not/ result in a very rigid set of criteria and process, but that it focuses on the main goals, the main ideas what we want with Wikimania - and that we revisit that shortly after Esino Lario to incorporate those lessons. That also gives some space to have a real life discussion at Wikimania about this plan :) It would be nice to have a good set of input for that real life discussion though!
Best, Lodewijk
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 12:11 AM, Siko Bouterse sbouterse@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi folks,
Just letting you know that I’m reading the recent Wikimania-focused mailing list threads with interest, as the Community Resources team is now on-point for funding and coordinating WMF’s involvement in Wikimania.
A couple of first thoughts to share:
- WMF has learned from past Wikimanias that we need to do our
due-diligence on venue etc before the host team and location is announced. One reason for this is that we have a limited budget for Wikimania, and doing a site visit before the host is finalized helps us ensure that we’re able to support the costs of the event in a given location. Ellie Young is headed to Montreal in 2 weeks and based on what she learns from that visit, we’re aiming to give the steering committee what they need to confirm selection before the end of 2015. That said, we recognize that communications around this haven’t gone as planned, and we are looking into improvements…(see thought 2)
- We, too, would like to see the movement building towards a shared
vision of Wikimania! It is great to see so many people, in true Wikimedian-style, thinking about big-picture questions of participation, representation, and content at Wikimania. Knowing that mailing list discussions have their limits, here’s how my team is thinking about collecting feedback more systematically for this going forward:
We’ll be launching a community consultation in November to help build towards more shared vision and process improvements for Wikimania 2018 - 2021. Two key inputs we’ve been thinking about using to launch that conversation are 1) responses from the survey of last Wikimania’s attendees and 2) the steering committee’s recommendation for host selection going forward.
We’re still regrouping from the latest Resources Consultation, and will begin planning for a Wikimania Consultation next week, so after that we’ll be able to share more information about what this consultation will look like and the exact timeline. Meanwhile, suggestions and open questions that you’d like to see resolved via this consultation are most welcome in this thread. My hope is that a consultation will help broaden participation in these conversations and get us from input to action.
Warm regards, Siko
-- Siko Bouterse Director of Community Resources Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
sbouterse@wikimedia.org
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. * *Donate https://donate.wikimedia.org or click the "edit" button today, and help us make it a reality!*
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Thanks for these suggestions, Lodewijk. Starting with the main goals and ideas before moving to detailed process and criteria makes a lot of sense. We'll need to define a process for 2018 before too long - one of the issues we're seeing is a need to select hosts earlier, because good venues book up early - so I'm not sure we can postpone the process discussions entirely until after Ensino Lario, but I hear your point about vision before process, and about using the next Wikimania to forward some phases of discussion in-person. We can look at options for how to accomplish this.
Cheers, Siko
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 6:12 AM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
Hi Siko,
Thanks for the constructive thoughts.
I agree it is good to focus on the future, and have a good discussion about this. I hope that chapters and organised groups (who could have higher odds for bidding/hosting) also discuss this topic, and use that as input. That way, more people can be included indirectly.
While I do think we should really discuss this, I do also think Esino Lario is a very brave experiment, and I would like to separate the discussion between general goals, and how we accomplish them. I expect we will learn many lessons from Esino Lario based on the very creative approach to the conference. Some things will work out great, and should be repeated, others probably give a less enthusiast feeling for repetition. That is nothing to be ashamed of, because if we never try, we never find out.
So I would like to propose that this consultation does /not/ result in a very rigid set of criteria and process, but that it focuses on the main goals, the main ideas what we want with Wikimania - and that we revisit that shortly after Esino Lario to incorporate those lessons. That also gives some space to have a real life discussion at Wikimania about this plan :) It would be nice to have a good set of input for that real life discussion though!
Best, Lodewijk
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 12:11 AM, Siko Bouterse sbouterse@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi folks,
Just letting you know that I’m reading the recent Wikimania-focused mailing list threads with interest, as the Community Resources team is now on-point for funding and coordinating WMF’s involvement in Wikimania.
A couple of first thoughts to share:
- WMF has learned from past Wikimanias that we need to do our
due-diligence on venue etc before the host team and location is announced. One reason for this is that we have a limited budget for Wikimania, and doing a site visit before the host is finalized helps us ensure that we’re able to support the costs of the event in a given location. Ellie Young is headed to Montreal in 2 weeks and based on what she learns from that visit, we’re aiming to give the steering committee what they need to confirm selection before the end of 2015. That said, we recognize that communications around this haven’t gone as planned, and we are looking into improvements…(see thought 2)
- We, too, would like to see the movement building towards a shared
vision of Wikimania! It is great to see so many people, in true Wikimedian-style, thinking about big-picture questions of participation, representation, and content at Wikimania. Knowing that mailing list discussions have their limits, here’s how my team is thinking about collecting feedback more systematically for this going forward:
We’ll be launching a community consultation in November to help build towards more shared vision and process improvements for Wikimania 2018 - 2021. Two key inputs we’ve been thinking about using to launch that conversation are 1) responses from the survey of last Wikimania’s attendees and 2) the steering committee’s recommendation for host selection going forward.
We’re still regrouping from the latest Resources Consultation, and will begin planning for a Wikimania Consultation next week, so after that we’ll be able to share more information about what this consultation will look like and the exact timeline. Meanwhile, suggestions and open questions that you’d like to see resolved via this consultation are most welcome in this thread. My hope is that a consultation will help broaden participation in these conversations and get us from input to action.
Warm regards, Siko
-- Siko Bouterse Director of Community Resources Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
sbouterse@wikimedia.org
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. * *Donate https://donate.wikimedia.org or click the "edit" button today, and help us make it a reality!*
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org