[Wikimania-l] [Foundation-l] Floating a notion: permanent Wikimania committee?
James Owen
jowen at wikimedia.org
Sun Jun 20 19:42:54 UTC 2010
I do not have a lot to add to this conversation as I believe most
everyone has been weighing in with ideas and insights that are much
inline with anything I would contribute. Mostly I want to share that
I fully support the creation of a committee or some kind of oversight
group which would not be responsible to create or develop Wikimania
every year, but would be a resource to the organizing team to set
expectations, timelines, assist with the obtainment of keynote
speakers, and develop relationship with the Foundation and community
to assist in the collaborative conference the Wikimedia community has
created. I do however want to make sure anyone who sits on this
committee/group is fully engaged and considers the responsibility
heavily and plans to work throughout the year to ensure local teams
have the resources they need and are fulfilling the commitment they
made when creating and winning a Wikimania bid. It would be reassuring
not only to the Wikimedia Foundation but to the Wikimedia Community to
know that a devoted group is ensuring and strategically thinking about
the success of not only individual Wikimania's but the future of the
conference for years to come. Currently we have a local planning teams
that create a bid and think about Wikimania for a year and then are
done with their work and move on to other projects, no one thinks
about the future of Wikimania -- do we want to always be a small
conference or do we aspired to see in 5-10 years a conference over
5,000 plus attendees, do we believe in rotation or do we pick bids
that are strongest, do we make Wikimania an outreach conference or
keep it internal and community focused... A body fully devoted to
answering these questions in my opinion would ensure the success and
future of the conference, and provide value well beyond the scope of
Wikimania.
Over the past year and a half I have been invested in the success an
organization of Wikimania, although some of this falls under the scope
of my position for the Foundation most of my contributions to the
conferences and jury is as a volunteer outside of the scope of my work
and work hours. I believe strongly that Wikimania is an important
event that not only allows Wikimedians to share with each other but
also is a platform to share with the world the capability of the
Wikimedia Community. I as a person who came to know Wikimedia not as
a volunteer but as an applicant for a job, attending events like
Wikimania has and continues to humble me when I see the work and
dedication of our volunteers. That is something I truly feel we
should share and I think Wikimania can help do that in communities
throughout the world.
I would be happy to sit on or help any oversight group that would be
committed to the long-term success of Wikimania. I thank Phoebe for
her efforts and dedication to this project and look forward to more
conversations in the days and weeks to come.
James T. Owen
James Owen
Executive Assistant
Wikimedia Foundation
Office +1.415.839.6885 x 604
Mobile +1.415.509.5444
Fax +1.415.882.0495
Email- jowen at wikimedia.org
Website- www.wikimediafoundation.org
On Jun 20, 2010, at 12:09 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
> Right, and the nature of what the Foundation has done has changed
> over the last few years, so that's actually been in flux (what was
> true for us in 2006 is totally different now, re: scholarships etc).
> Which makes it even harder to get an authoritative answer!
>
> Otherwise, I totally agree with Ray. There is no group/body/
> individual providing that kind of comprehensive timeline support
> now, unless someone decides to step in and make it their job, and it
> would be nice to see things a bit more organized on that front.
> Basically: the community & the Foundation have certain expectations
> for Wikimania, but it's up to the local team to implement them. The
> bid criteria reflect these expectations pretty well, I think, but it
> might be nice if they were more explicit.
>
> -- phoebe
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 5:41 AM, Harel Cain <harel.cain at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Let me just point out in response to Ray: the "one stop shop"
> contact person on the Foundation staff will be answerable to
> Foundation-related questions (funding, sponsorship, program,
> scholarships) etc. Of course things which are local by nature such
> as entertainment programs, catering, venue, local government
> relations etc. are better answered by the local team (we can learn
> from others' experience, but the solution is local by nature). It's
> just that as a local team we're not too sure who to ask about the
> Foundation-related issues, and we need a better address for that.
>
>
> Harel
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
> wrote:
> phoebe ayers wrote:
> > Yes. Let me be extremely clear: this committee would not organize
> > Wikimania. Full stop. That is, and has always been, the job of the
> > local team that gets appointed to run the bid.
> >
> > What Harel is saying that there isn't a formal point of contact
> within
> > the WMF, which is true. Yes, every person who has been named in
> this
> > thread so far has worked on Wikimania in the past, and/or has a
> > specific area of expertise. What a *committee* would be good for is
> > making sure that all of these connections are made. For instance,
> Kul
> > works on sponsorships. He is one direct point of contact within WMF
> > for Wikimania-related funding issues. But he doesn't -- shouldn't --
> > answer all of your questions about Wikimania. Conversely, Delphine,
> > me, Samuel, and a bunch of other people know the history of
> Wikimania
> > and roughly what is going on -- but I don't think any of us want to
> > keep volunteering to be on the organization committee year after
> year.
> > And if Delphine or I are unavailable for some reason, that shouldn't
> > mean the local team can't get their questions answered. Having a
> group
> > rather than just one or two people makes it more failsafe.
> >
> > So yes, keeping a general eye on progress is what I would go for
> here.
> > The "actions" of the committee would only consist in that -- getting
> > reports, making sure questions are answered. All other
> organizational
> > actions -- the ones that Moushira are fondly remembering ;) -- would
> > be done by the local team, as ever.
> Speaking in general support for this proposal, I too think that it's
> important for the organization of particular Wikimanias to remain with
> the local community. Pulling together the documentation and the
> planning guide will be an important ongoing task for this group, but
> the
> committee should be able to draw on a variety of experiences as and
> when
> necessity arises, and local committees discover a deficiency. For
> this
> year it was important that Austin was able to step in when it was
> discovered that registration was not being organized. It's one
> thing to
> respond when a local groip asks for help, but it's equally important
> to
> be aware that lack of experience may mean that those local groups may
> not know they're in trouble until it's too late. Thus, the planning
> guide should also include a timeline for when things must be done. If
> registration needs to be open two months before the event, and has an
> impact on the ability of attendees to obtain visas, the committee
> needs
> to be in a position to act quickly when things are not being done.
>
> Harel said:
> > I'm more confident, thought, that we're missing one or more "formal"
> > "one-stop-shop" points of contact, people who can answer us in an
> > on-going and interactive manner not only based on their accumulated
> > experience, but rather with full authority about their answers.
>
> The problem with that approach is that the committee may not be
> familiar
> with local circumstances, and different committee members may be the
> best ones to ask depending on the nature of the problem. No committee
> could have come up with the kind of excellent attendee's party that we
> experienced in Alexandria, or could have come up with the museum venue
> that we had in Boston. Harel's suggestion carries the risk of undue
> dependance on the committee or WMF staff.
>
> When the selection committee chooses a site it is expressing a
> degree of
> confidence that the local group will be able to carry through with its
> mandate. If it has no confidence in any of the applicants it is free
> to
> reject them all, though the consequences of that would be uncertain.
> By
> the time of its decision it should also be aware of potential
> difficulties where additional help may be needed.
>
> Ray
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
>
> --
> Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/attachments/20100620/e401785d/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the Wikimania-l
mailing list