On 30 September 2014 14:12, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
I'm seriously having doubts why this is becoming such a drama for some people. There's a clear process (the Wikimania committee selects a jury, which selects a winning bid to be confirmed by the WMF) and they asked for volunteers, which they selected a jury from. Yay.
There is no process published. You may think this is clear, but there are no records published and no criteria are set. As an example I have been unable to identify who sits on the "Wikimania Steering Group" nor find any published minutes for its meetings, despite this being a body that bears responsibility for hundreds of thousands of dollars of donated funds. Perhaps you do, and can link us to this information?
Because lets face it, being on the jury is a boring task and little fun. Why are you (plural) trying so hard to make it even less fun...
These are indeed assertions, and I agree to focus on responding to factual questions instead.
The questions in this thread (as raised by Itzik, Beria and myself) were not answered, they appear to be sidestepped. It is unclear why, so I put some assertions which you are free to counter with any facts you are aware of, such as whether at least 5 out of 7 jury members have been employees of the WMF or chapters.
So again: Thanks for spending all this effort and time!
No problem. Wikimedia has a shared value of openness and transparency, I believe it is worth spending a moment to pick up on where our processes, such as for Wikimania governance, appear to be failing these values. It may not be the fun you are advocating, but governance is an important part of what we need to do.
Fae