Seems that Wikimedia UK are the body involved in running this event,,,,
Gordo
Did you have a point?
On 18 March 2013 22:47, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
Seems that Wikimedia UK are the body involved in running this event,,,,
Gordo
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 18/03/2013 22:47, Gordon Joly wrote:
Seems that Wikimedia UK are the body involved in running this event,,,,
Wikimedia UK is supporting the bid, offering advice and support where it can. The actual bid itself is led by volunteers Ed, James, Kimi, Anastasia, ...
On 18 March 2013 22:57, Katie Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
On 18/03/2013 22:47, Gordon Joly wrote:
Seems that Wikimedia UK are the body involved in running this event,,,,
Wikimedia UK is supporting the bid, offering advice and support where it can. The actual bid itself is led by volunteers Ed, James, Kimi, Anastasia, ...
Just because something is being done by volunteers doesn't mean it isn't being done by Wikimedia UK. We need to get away from the idea that "Wikimedia UK" is synonymous with "The Board and Staff of Wikimedia UK".
Alternatively, we need to get used to the idea that if all the lead organisers are members and volunteers of WMUK, and WMUK as an organisation also claims to support the event, it will be considered as run by WMUK whatever we say otherwise. On Mar 18, 2013 11:02 PM, "Thomas Dalton" thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 March 2013 22:57, Katie Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
On 18/03/2013 22:47, Gordon Joly wrote:
Seems that Wikimedia UK are the body involved in running this event,,,,
Wikimedia UK is supporting the bid, offering advice and support where it can. The actual bid itself is led by volunteers Ed, James, Kimi,
Anastasia,
...
Just because something is being done by volunteers doesn't mean it isn't being done by Wikimedia UK. We need to get away from the idea that "Wikimedia UK" is synonymous with "The Board and Staff of Wikimedia UK".
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 18/03/2013 23:02, Thomas Dalton wrote:
On 18 March 2013 22:57, Katie Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
On 18/03/2013 22:47, Gordon Joly wrote:
Seems that Wikimedia UK are the body involved in running this event,,,,
Wikimedia UK is supporting the bid, offering advice and support where it can. The actual bid itself is led by volunteers Ed, James, Kimi, Anastasia, ...
Just because something is being done by volunteers doesn't mean it isn't being done by Wikimedia UK. We need to get away from the idea that "Wikimedia UK" is synonymous with "The Board and Staff of Wikimedia UK".
Of course I understand that, and I have always agree with that. I am actually hurt with the suggestion, deliberate or otherwise, that I have suddenly forgotten that because I have started working for Wikimedia UK!
In this case, the bid isn't being submitted by volunteers and members of Wikimedia UK as part of Wikimedia UK. They are doing it as individuals with the support of Wikimedia UK the organisation. Going with your wording, just because something is being done by volunteers and or members of Wikimedia UK doesn't mean it is being done by Wikimedia UK.
On 18 March 2013 23:10, Katie Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
In this case, the bid isn't being submitted by volunteers and members of Wikimedia UK as part of Wikimedia UK. They are doing it as individuals with the support of Wikimedia UK the organisation. Going with your wording, just because something is being done by volunteers and or members of Wikimedia UK doesn't mean it is being done by Wikimedia UK.
And the volunteer team being able to wave around the name "Wikimedia UK" will be exceedingly useful - the perception of organisational backing can be a powerful form of organisational backing.
- d.
On 18 March 2013 23:10, Katie Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
In this case, the bid isn't being submitted by volunteers and members of Wikimedia UK as part of Wikimedia UK.
The bid is funded by WMUK, the bid team are operating out of the WMUK office and the intention is for everything to be booked and paid for in the name of WMUK. Explain to me how this isn't a WMUK bid...
On 18 March 2013 23:16, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 March 2013 23:10, Katie Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
In this case, the bid isn't being submitted by volunteers and members of Wikimedia UK as part of Wikimedia UK.
The bid is funded by WMUK, the bid team are operating out of the WMUK office and the intention is for everything to be booked and paid for in the name of WMUK. Explain to me how this isn't a WMUK bid...
I am unfamiliar with the concept of a "WMUK volunteer". Wikimedian volunteers who happen to be in the UK may have no connection at all to WMUK, and throwing the phrase around is unhelpful.
Charles
Perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this early in the morning, but I can't actually see why these semantics matter - certainly compared with, for example, delivering a high-quality bid.
On 19 March 2013 08:26, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 18 March 2013 23:16, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 March 2013 23:10, Katie Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
In this case, the bid isn't being submitted by volunteers and members of Wikimedia UK as part of Wikimedia UK.
The bid is funded by WMUK, the bid team are operating out of the WMUK office and the intention is for everything to be booked and paid for in the name of WMUK. Explain to me how this isn't a WMUK bid...
I am unfamiliar with the concept of a "WMUK volunteer". Wikimedian volunteers who happen to be in the UK may have no connection at all to WMUK, and throwing the phrase around is unhelpful.
Charles
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 19/03/13 08:40, James Farrar wrote:
Perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this early in the morning, but I can't actually see why these semantics matter - certainly compared with, for example, delivering a high-quality bid.
Very high quality. And that may be an issue.... the Barbican, keynotes from Jimmy Wales, Stephen Fry, Cory Doctrow and now.... Boris Johnson.
How things have changed since Frankfurt! Bring back Stallman!!!
Gordo
On 19/03/13 08:44, Gordon Joly wrote:
On 19/03/13 08:40, James Farrar wrote:
Perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this early in the morning, but I can't actually see why these semantics matter - certainly compared with, for example, delivering a high-quality bid.
Very high quality. And that may be an issue.... the Barbican, keynotes from Jimmy Wales, Stephen Fry, Cory Doctrow and now.... Boris Johnson.
How things have changed since Frankfurt! Bring back Stallman!!!
Gordo
OOPS. Not necessarily keynote speakers(?), and "Cory Doctorow" (spelling).
Gordo
On 19 March 2013 08:40, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this early in the morning, but I can't actually see why these semantics matter - certainly compared with, for example, delivering a high-quality bid.
On 19 March 2013 08:26, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 18 March 2013 23:16, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 March 2013 23:10, Katie Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
In this case, the bid isn't being submitted by volunteers and members of Wikimedia UK as part of Wikimedia UK.
The bid is funded by WMUK, the bid team are operating out of the WMUK office and the intention is for everything to be booked and paid for in the name of WMUK. Explain to me how this isn't a WMUK bid...
I am unfamiliar with the concept of a "WMUK volunteer". Wikimedian volunteers who happen to be in the UK may have no connection at all to WMUK, and throwing the phrase around is unhelpful.
In short, because the stakeholder analysis in the WMUK comms strategy seems to me not to have been implemented. A stakeholder analysis is not "semantics": it is being clear about the vague concept of "community". A comms strategy is what you rely on when you suddenly need people to turn up and back a major event. Not having an adequate one can bite you in the bum.
Charles
Some interesting comments here!
First of all the idea of WMUK supporting the bid has been chewed over by the board for many months. In the end they agreed to support the bid.
Wikimania bids have not come from chapters traditionally but from volunteers in the local community. The support of the local chapter, if there is one, is seen as a plus.
If the bid is successful we will work out a way of balancing the support the chapter can give with the desires of the independent bidding team. As Chris says this has been harmonious so far and we have offered them space in the office when they needed it.
So beyond that there are no plans. Obviously we have been thinking about options and talking to previous hosts and the foundation about what would be good practice.
But get involved!
It isn't the Olympic but it would be BIG. Taking off my CEO at I will be lobbying for WIkimania only cycle lanes between the Barbican and the office,
Jon
On 19 March 2013 08:52, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.comwrote:
On 19 March 2013 08:40, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this early in the morning, but I can't actually see why these semantics matter - certainly compared with, for example, delivering a high-quality bid.
On 19 March 2013 08:26, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 18 March 2013 23:16, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 March 2013 23:10, Katie Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
In this case, the bid isn't being submitted by volunteers and members
of
Wikimedia UK as part of Wikimedia UK.
The bid is funded by WMUK, the bid team are operating out of the WMUK office and the intention is for everything to be booked and paid for in the name of WMUK. Explain to me how this isn't a WMUK bid...
I am unfamiliar with the concept of a "WMUK volunteer". Wikimedian volunteers who happen to be in the UK may have no connection at all to WMUK, and throwing the phrase around is unhelpful.
In short, because the stakeholder analysis in the WMUK comms strategy seems to me not to have been implemented. A stakeholder analysis is not "semantics": it is being clear about the vague concept of "community". A comms strategy is what you rely on when you suddenly need people to turn up and back a major event. Not having an adequate one can bite you in the bum.
Charles
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 19 March 2013 08:40, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this early in the morning, but I can't actually see why these semantics matter - certainly compared with, for example, delivering a high-quality bid.
They don't. This thread is mostly hair-splitting for the sake of bloody-mindedness, not anything that will actually help anything anywhere.
- d.
On 19 March 2013 09:39, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 March 2013 08:40, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this early in the morning, but I can't actually see why these semantics matter - certainly compared with, for example, delivering a high-quality bid.
They don't. This thread is mostly hair-splitting for the sake of bloody-mindedness, not anything that will actually help anything anywhere.
No worries then. The much-neglected grassroots activists will turn up in droves, tip their hats, and ask only yo be called on again when Wikimania next hits London.
Charles
On 19 March 2013 09:52, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 19 March 2013 09:39, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 March 2013 08:40, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this early in the morning, but I can't actually see why these semantics matter - certainly compared with, for example, delivering a high-quality bid.
They don't. This thread is mostly hair-splitting for the sake of bloody-mindedness, not anything that will actually help anything anywhere.
No worries then. The much-neglected grassroots activists will turn up in droves, tip their hats, and ask only yo be called on again when Wikimania next hits London.
If you manage to snatch defeat from victory but succeed in making your point, will you personally consider it a win?
- d.
On 19 March 2013 09:59, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 March 2013 09:52, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 19 March 2013 09:39, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 March 2013 08:40, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this early in the morning, but I can't actually see why these semantics matter - certainly compared with, for example, delivering a high-quality bid.
They don't. This thread is mostly hair-splitting for the sake of bloody-mindedness, not anything that will actually help anything anywhere.
No worries then. The much-neglected grassroots activists will turn up in droves, tip their hats, and ask only yo be called on again when Wikimania next hits London.
If you manage to snatch defeat from victory but succeed in making your point, will you personally consider it a win?
There is still time to communicate more effectively with said grassroots. This is a theme I have been addressing in what I hope have been non-adversarial ways since I stopped working for WMUK (pretty much on this issue). I don't see that win-win is out of the question.
Credit for the stakeholder analysis business should go to Fae, with whom I raised this point quite some time ago. It just needs to be higher up the agenda, like all the other things (there aren't that many) that would grow the active UK community. I put the point this way to a WMUK trustee recently: the question of how many outreachy-networky things WMUK should be taking on is of the nature "how long is a piece of string?", while the grow-the-base things are "fingers of one hand".
What I'm really not happy about is the conference strand being a cuckoo in the nest.
Charles
On 18 Mar 2013, at 23:02, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 March 2013 22:57, Katie Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
On 18/03/2013 22:47, Gordon Joly wrote:
Seems that Wikimedia UK are the body involved in running this event,,,,
Wikimedia UK is supporting the bid, offering advice and support where it can. The actual bid itself is led by volunteers Ed, James, Kimi, Anastasia, ...
Just because something is being done by volunteers doesn't mean it isn't being done by Wikimedia UK. We need to get away from the idea that "Wikimedia UK" is synonymous with "The Board and Staff of Wikimedia UK".
+1. I'm not sure whether that idea actually exists, but if it does then it needs to be firmly stamped out as it would be completely wrong.
In this case, WMUK staff are working with and supporting the WMUK volunteers that are putting forward the bid, and the WMUK volunteer board is watching and providing governance, guidance and assistance where it can. WMUK resources, including policies and infrastructure, will be used should the bid be successful. There may be future cross-over between volunteer and staff roles here, which will be duly managed by the WMUK Chief Exec and Board. The dynamics seem to be working well here at the moment.
The thing I'm personally worried about is that not enough WMUK volunteers are engaging with the bid. So if you're reading this and you're not already involved in the bid, then please involve yourself!
Thanks, Mike
-- Mike Peel Secretary, Wikimedia UK http://mikepeel.net/ - @mike_peel http://wikimedia.org.uk/ - @wikimediauk
Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). It is an independent charitable organization with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No. 1144513. The Registered Office is at 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT, United Kingdom.
On 18/03/13 23:15, Michael Peel wrote:
The thing I'm personally worried about is that not enough WMUK volunteers are engaging with the bid. So if you're reading this and you're not already involved in the bid, then please involve yourself!
The bid mentions the "70,000 volunteers" (Games Makers) of the London 2012 Olympics......
Gordo
P.S. I have already volunteered.
On 18/03/13 22:57, Katie Chan wrote:
On 18/03/2013 22:47, Gordon Joly wrote:
Seems that Wikimedia UK are the body involved in running this event,,,,
Wikimedia UK is supporting the bid, offering advice and support where it can. The actual bid itself is led by volunteers Ed, James, Kimi, Anastasia, ...
Will Wikimedia UK be company doing the business (hiring, contracts, publicity, registration, etc), or will a new company be formed for the purpose?
Gordo
Will Wikimedia UK be company doing the business (hiring, contracts, publicity, registration, etc), or will a new company be formed for the purpose?
We are looking at these kinds of details at the moment and haven't reached a firm decision, but I think we're tending towards the former.
(For what it's worth, I prefer to look at it as the bid team's Wikimania bid, supported by Wikimedia UK, rather than as "a Wikimedia UK bid". But hairsplitting aside, I'm really glad that it's a bottom-up, volunteer-led bid which we are helping.)
Chris
On 19/03/13 08:18, Chris Keating wrote:
Will Wikimedia UK be company doing the business (hiring, contracts, publicity, registration, etc), or will a new company be formed for the purpose?We are looking at these kinds of details at the moment and haven't reached a firm decision, but I think we're tending towards the former.
(For what it's worth, I prefer to look at it as the bid team's Wikimania bid, supported by Wikimedia UK, rather than as "a Wikimedia UK bid". But hairsplitting aside, I'm really glad that it's a bottom-up, volunteer-led bid which we are helping.)
Chris
Thanks.
A subsidiary company?
Gordo
On 19 March 2013 09:41, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
A subsidiary company?
That would be my suggestion. It isolates the charity's main funds from the risks of the event (which will have a budget roughly equal to the annual budget of the rest of the charity, so the risks are pretty substantial) while still providing most of the benefits of going through WMUK.
It's a complex set of affairs - but this is something that we'll have to discuss in part with the WMF's financial and legal teams, once the UK team win the bid. We're still in the first stages at the moment. Rest assured that we will be taking professional advice - but that any other opinions or offers of help will be greatly appreciated!
The key goal, of course, is to protect the charity, the movement, and most importantly the volunteers.
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 19 March 2013 12:29, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 March 2013 09:41, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
A subsidiary company?
That would be my suggestion. It isolates the charity's main funds from the risks of the event (which will have a budget roughly equal to the annual budget of the rest of the charity, so the risks are pretty substantial) while still providing most of the benefits of going through WMUK.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Hi All
I am glad to see there is loads of enthusiasm for the Wikimania bid.
To reiterate Richards point below. There are concerns and issues that we need to solve but I am confident we will find an appropriate solution.
I have had a meeting with Ed and James who are well aware of the contractual positions, legal risks and general issues that rise out of such an event. There are many ways to cut this and to provide a structure to deliver the event.
Great to see support for the bid and here is hoping we can win it!
Thanks Saad
-----Original Message----- From: wikimediauk-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimediauk-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Richard Symonds Sent: 19 March 2013 12:52 To: UK Wikimedia mailing list Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Wikimania 2014 in London.
It's a complex set of affairs - but this is something that we'll have to discuss in part with the WMF's financial and legal teams, once the UK team win the bid. We're still in the first stages at the moment. Rest assured that we will be taking professional advice - but that any other opinions or offers of help will be greatly appreciated!
The key goal, of course, is to protect the charity, the movement, and most importantly the volunteers.
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 19 March 2013 12:29, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 March 2013 09:41, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
A subsidiary company?
That would be my suggestion. It isolates the charity's main funds from the risks of the event (which will have a budget roughly equal to the annual budget of the rest of the charity, so the risks are pretty substantial) while still providing most of the benefits of going through WMUK.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 19/03/13 12:52, Richard Symonds wrote:
It's a complex set of affairs - but this is something that we'll have to discuss in part with the WMF's financial and legal teams, once the UK team win the bid. We're still in the first stages at the moment. Rest assured that we will be taking professional advice - but that any other opinions or offers of help will be greatly appreciated!
The key goal, of course, is to protect the charity, the movement, and most importantly the volunteers.
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
I think the problem comes from questions on the wiki. Some people want more exact answers now.
Gordo
[putting WM2013 hat on] Wikimedia Hong Kong thought about setting up a subsidiary company for Wikimania 2013 but decided against it. This is because the subsidiary company (and therefore Wikimania) will not enjoy charity benefits, discounts, or tax deductibility, which renders "the benefits of going through" the chapter nothing more than a brand name. Deryck On 19 March 2013 12:29, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 March 2013 09:41, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
A subsidiary company?
That would be my suggestion. It isolates the charity's main funds from the risks of the event (which will have a budget roughly equal to the annual budget of the rest of the charity, so the risks are pretty substantial) while still providing most of the benefits of going through WMUK.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 19 March 2013 15:42, Deryck Chan deryckchan@gmail.com wrote:
[putting WM2013 hat on] Wikimedia Hong Kong thought about setting up a subsidiary company for Wikimania 2013 but decided against it. This is because the subsidiary company (and therefore Wikimania) will not enjoy charity benefits, discounts, or tax deductibility, which renders "the benefits of going through" the chapter nothing more than a brand name.
It may be different in HK, but in the UK it is still possible to take advantage of charitable status while working through a subsidiary. (See my email to the other thread.)
wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org