[Foundation-l] Taipei chosen to host Wikimania 2007

[Ray Saintonge]

Andrew Gray wrote:

>On 28/09/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>The procedure as it is evidently needs work, since other bidders (e.g.
>>London) are disappointed at their hard work being pretty much wasted.
>>
>>The current system seems to ensure a lot of volunteer time and effort
>>being futile. This is damaging to the project.
>>    
>>
>The problem is that either we make a choice based on three or four
>groups who've invested a lot of effort - which guarantees wasting a
>fair lump of effort - or we make a choice before the detailed work has
>been done, which would mean we save the legwork of the other teams
>*but* we make a decision based on very little evidence. And if it then
>turns out that the really really really optomistic bid for Gothab
>isn't going to work once we start scaring up sponsorship etc, it's a
>bit late to select an alternative...
>
>It strikes me that any competitive bidding process, where the actual
>work is devolved to a largely unknown local community, is going to
>require a degree of wasted effort as all communities bidding try to
>demonstrate they can achieve the required level. It's not ideal, but
>neither is it simple ineptitude... it's necessary.
>
I don't have any problem with the bidding process either.  In business 
when a construction project is up for bids, anyone who wants to have a 
reasonable chance of winning will have to show that he can do his 
homework.  Bidders for the Olympics put a tremendous amount of money and 
energy into preparing their bids without any guarantee of return.  If 
they suggested to their potential sponsors that winniing the bid was a 
sure thing that would be deceptive.

The shortlisted bids seemed to have been very strong, and three of them 
had to lose.

I don't think that it helps the transparency of the process when someone 
like Jimbo begins by supporting a bid before the bidding has seriously 
started.  It's the kind of prejudicial comment that tells everyone else 
to give up before they even try.  It casts doubt on whether he believes 
that the community has enough maturity to make good choices.

An effective self-governing community requires a high level of trust, 
especially when it errs in its decisions.  As time goes on the Gods need 
to remember that there are more and more people with a long term 
investment of time and commitment, and that extended commitment is not 
consistent with acting stupidly.  Intervention from on high should be 
limited to situations where the community has gone seriously off track 
from its fundamental principles.

Ec