Béria L,
Yes, I was heartened to see that the formula had changed in 2015. But the
complexity of the algorithm made it hard to discern what the eventual
impact and numbers were for US-based editors. If you have good stats on
this, I’d appreciate a pointer.
Again, I agree that Wikimania should have massive outreach goal with the
bulk of the scholarships should be used to recruit new key members to our
community and evangelizing the mission outside the US. When I was based in
Asia, I was a big advocate for Wikimania being a way to engage new language
groups.
However, I wanted to push back against the oft-heard refrain that the US is
“overly subsidized” when in fact most metrics show this is not the case.
Thanks!
-Andrew
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Béria Lima <berialima(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Andrew,
*For the last few years I’ve held my tongue as American applicants get a
fraction of 10% of all the funding for Wikimania
scholarships.*
Actually you are looking at the old numbers. Both Wikimanias 2015 and 2016
uses a new method of selection. Now, the Global North*[1] *has 25% of all
scholarships, and the Global South*[2]* has 75%. Now that you have to
compete with most of the rich countries in the world. And is not all: If
you get into the final 10% of the "cutoff",your place may be taken away by
a woman (or transgender) or a Latino, since that is the policy now*[3]*.
And I for one agree with the new policy. The effort made by a European (or
American, or Canadian) to travel to a Wikimania, is something like one
month of salary. For a woman from the same place will probably be 2 months
(pay gap at its finest!) and for a Latino, African, or Asiatic the effort
starts at 6 months and go on to even a decade*[4]* (A full decade of your
salary to go to Wikimania).
So no, I don't feel sorry that most of the scholarships don't go to
Americans, I'm not denying that there is poor people in rich countries but
the level of poverty is *way* too different.
Béria L
. de Rodríguez (a Latino Woman 😉)
_______________________________
*References:*
[1]: Australia, Canada, Israel, Hong Kong, Macau, New Zealand, Japan,
Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, the United States and all of Europe
(including Russia, but excluding Turkey) (source
<https://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_South>)
[2]: Asia (with the exception of Japan, Hong Kong, Macau, Singapore, South
Korea and Taiwan), Turkey, Central America, South America, Mexico, Africa,
and the Middle East (with the exception of Israel) (source
<https://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_South>)
[3]: For applicants within 10% of the "cutoff", preference will be* first*
given to the* non-male* applicant, and *secondary* preference to applicants
from* Latin America*.(source
<https://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Selection_process>
-
enfasis added by me)
[4]: Venezuela for example has a exchange rate Bolivar-US dolar of 1026 BSF
to 1 dolar. Their average salary is 9,500 BSF (about $ 9,00) at that pace
their probability to attend Wikimania on their own tends to zero. (source
for the exchange rate <https://dolartoday.com/>)
_____
***Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a
construir esse sonho.*
2016-02-10 13:43 GMT-02:00 Andrew Lih <andrew.lih(a)gmail.com>om>:
GerardM,
As much as I agree with you on many things related to Wikimania, your
statement about en.wp and USA being “over subsidized” is off base.
For the last few years I’ve held my tongue as American applicants get a
fraction of 10% of all the funding for Wikimania scholarships. That’s
because 10% is allocated to all of North America, so US based folks
compete
with Canadians for that small slice of the pie.
Indeed, key community
members from the US could not afford to go to Wikimania, and did not,
because of the limited funding. We also do not have a strong chapter
system
to make up for that shortcoming, where European
chapters can, and do,
underwrite their local members with other funds.
I am not against the bulk of the scholarship money going to
underrepresented developing markets and giving new voices a chance to
attend. But I wanted to dispel the myth that Americans are always gorging
at the trough.
https://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Scholarship_selection…
https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Selection_process
-Andrew
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hoi,
Pine with all due respect, the USA is not the problem and English
Wikipedia
has been overly subsidised, given way too much
attention. Indeed having
more people from the USA attend Wikimania is not a good value
proposition.
> The USA and Britain is overrepresented as it is.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> On 10 February 2016 at 10:13, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From a US perspective, even here in the global north we have plenty
of
>
students and middle-class participants for whom $1500 in travel, food
and
> lodging plus 5 days away from work, family,
or school amounts to a
> significant or impossible sacrifice.
>
> Perhaps someone could tell us the statistics for how many people have
> attended Wikimania each year who were not WMF employees, FDC or WMF
Board
members,
scholarship recipients, or financially sponsored by WMF
affiliates
> or WEF. Of those people who pay 100% of their own costs plus the cost
of
> admission tickets, my guess is that many
live within a day's travel
time
by
> train, car, or bus.
>
> I would hypothesize that thematic conferences also have a low
percentage
of
people who pay 100% of their own costs, but that
regional conferences
which
> have lower travel costs for the average attendee receive modestly
higher
> percentages of unsubsidized attendance.
>
> It seems to me that WMF finacial support for conferences, including
> regional and thematic conferences, will continue to be the norm.
>
> Whether $1 million is appropriate for Wikimania and whether a more
modest
> > budget would be appropriate and feasable are different questions that
> merit
> > careful reflection.
> >
> > Pine
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>