We have a vested interest, as a community, in having as diverse a group of people behind our content as possible, because we have a diverse group of readers. "People who can't afford a lunch out whenever they want" is a demographic: a big one, depending on the country in question. Coming up with statements that editathons go great when the editor or newcomer in question covers all their personal costs ignores the massive number of people who cannot afford to do that and so will not attend. If your reaction to that is discussions about studies or politically contentious plane tickets then you've, at best, completely missed the point I was trying to make.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 March 2015 at 14:33, Oliver Keyes ironholds@gmail.com wrote: ...
expectations. So, yes, editathons work well when attendees pay their own way - but they work /best/ when they don't.
I believe there is no verifiable evidence that editathons work best when attendees have all their costs paid. If there is, could someone provide a link please?
There have been occasions where the way some attendees received payments to attend, including flying in from other countries, has been both politically contentious and anecdotally resulted in attendees without funding being put off using their volunteer time to support editathons run on the same basis. By "anecdotally" I include both this being said to me and there being emails on various lists relating this viewpoint.
Fae
faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe