[Wikimediaau-l] Bidding for Wikimania 2012

[Virtual Steve]

Liam in response to your message below,



I find myself firmly in agreement with Andrew's caution as to what is said that the
Chapter supported, particularly given that a new board is
about to be elected.  I am also concerned by the timing of the release
of this information so close to that election as it tends to leave an
inaccurate impression on the new board as to what are its earliest points
of agenda. 



I would rather see accurate reference to the facts that occur/occurred
in committee meetings from the outset of correspondence - rather than
after concerns are raised, as this will remove the chance of
misunderstanding occurring.  It is also important that a board remains
a committee of elected officers who in public work and speak cohesively
and accurately - with individuals only delivering the exact message
agreed to by the board.  So, if as you say this was only a fact finding mission,
then the facts on your research only should have been presented to
the board and the community.



In relation to the bid itself, whilst I can understand action to get
bids in early, suggesting support (real or tacit) by the chapter for the current early
bid will make us look disjointed, if we as a chapter agree later
to support a bid in another part of the country.  Indeed there are many
reasons why Sydney may not be the best suggested location of a chapter
supported bid and that point alone is worth discussion, by the
community and the committee.



Steve





>On  Thu, 26 Nov 2009 14:12 PM, Liam <liamwyatt at gmail.com> wrote in response to Andrew:
> 
> > Just a note re the above:
> >
> >
> > > The Chapter committee gave me permission/support to meet with and canvas
> > ideas with BES on an in-principle basis.
> >
> > > Subsequently to the first meeting, I sought committee approval to bring
> > Angela into the discussions too.
> >
> > > permission has been sought from the Chapter committee for this early
> > discussion.
> >
> > I don't mean to be annoying here, but I think we need to be very careful
> > about these kinds of statements.
> >
> > As an observer member of the committee, I can say with moderate certainty
> > that the committee never resolved nor approved anything. There are no
> > meeting minutes or resolutions covering it, and looking at the comm list
> > emails, I would say a more correct statement was that the committee were
> > notified of it, and that the committee did not oppose or object.
> >
> > regards
> > Andrew
> >
> 
> I was not trying to imply that the WM-Au committee formally supports a bid,
> but that the committee was kept informed as to what I (and subsequently
> Angela and I) were up to and that I asked permission each time. "Notified"
> is indeed a good term for it. We never voted on it in meetings because there
> was nothing formal to vote on. Rather, it was raised on the mailing list to
> make sure that everyone on the committee was informed and to give a chance
> for people to raise any concerns or provide advice. Since no one raised any
> objections to this course of action you could call this tacit support. It
> has always been clear that the Australian Wikimedian community at large
> involved (and the committee would debate and vote) when we are at a stage of
> actually deciding on a course of action. Until then, it remains a
> fact-finding mission.
> Does this clarify things?
> -Liam


 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Looking to move this spring? With all the lastest places, searching has never been easier. Look now!
http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/157631292/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaau-l/attachments/20091127/3fc31ab5/attachment-0001.htm