Without commenting on any other point or expressing any other opinions wrt either bid, I don't think the board has let us down at all (and I'm hardly known for speaking up in defence of the board!). Having to choose between two bids from cities with strong Wikimedia communities, one of which was built by a sitting trustee, would put the board in a very difficult position, and favouring one bid over the other risked creating division in the community (and even the board itself).  Harry ________________________________ From: Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> To: wikimediauk-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Saturday, 31 March 2012, 22:26 Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] London Bid for Wikimania 2013 On 31 March 2012 22:10, Edward Saperia <edsaperia(a)gmail.com> wrote: The bidding timeline says: "30 March 2012 (23:59 UTC): Bidding ends; all major information on the bid pages must be final." Some of the things you describe as still needing to be added sound fairly major to me. Your bid page also says "This bid will lose its draft status over the weekend of the 31st of March." and that it will then be translated. It sounds like you are a little behind schedule. I think it is very unfortunate that the chapter has allowed two bids to be developed without any support, rather than picking one and getting behind it. We now have two bids that, to be honest, aren't particularly good (I know there are people that have worked very hard on both bids, but neither is really at the stage it should be by this point or has the team behind it that it needs). If we had concentrated on one bid and had had the support of the chapter, we could have had one bid that was extremely good. I think the board has let us down by failing to provide strong, decisive leadership. I haven't looked in detail at what the other bids have produced, so it is hard to say what the UK's chances of winning are, but they are certainly lower than they could have been. If one of our bids does win, I'm sure everyone will rally round and make it a success, but we could have done much better. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

On 31 March 2012 22:57, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote: You make the assumption that the people who had worked on the rejected bid would have shaken that rejection off to give their wholehearted support to the chosen bid.

On 1 April 2012 00:42, Anthony (AGK) <wikiagk(a)gmail.com> wrote: Crikey, a win for any UK bid would be a win for WMUK! - d.

On 1 April 2012 10:41, Gordon Joly <gordon.joly(a)pobox.com> wrote: Well, *yes*, really obviously. However, the post I was replying to specifically concerned WMUK. - d.

On 1 April 2012 00:42, Anthony (AGK) <wikiagk(a)gmail.com> wrote: Paid employees of WMUK haven't been involved in either bid, that's part of what I'm complaining about. (Richard has been working on the London one in his spare time, but not as a WMUK employee).

It's the Chapters role to support a successful bid - but the bids themselves should, we feel, be community-driven, not chapter-driven. The chapter has a policy that says we cannot do anything that a volunteer will do - we're here to support a volunteer-run bid with funding, advice and staff. Richard Symonds Office& Development Manager Wikimedia UK +44 (0)207 065 0991 On 01/04/2012 02:20, Anthony (AGK) wrote:

On 01/04/2012 02:20, Anthony (AGK) wrote: Job demarcation. WMUK may not take on a task that volunteer could do. Gordo -- Gordon Joly gordon.joly(a)pobox.com http://www.joly.org.uk/ Don't Leave Space To The Professionals!