Hi, I must admit I have my doubts on multiple of the involved questions. While I agree it is an important topic, I think the most appropriate thing would be to bring this discussion to a larger stage - where it should have been a long time ago according to our planning. Especially since time seems to be catching up with us (discussions are happening without this groups involvement *as a group*) I am not sure how people would respond if we were to have yet another real life meeting right before the chapters meeting. I think it would be received critically and rightfully so.
If movement roles (the topic, not the group) is a significant part of the agenda, and adding someone who has now quite some experience thinking about that topic would be helpful and not too costly - I think it would be a good idea. Not because that person deserved that right through this group but because the expertise would be helpful. In general I think it would be good if the organizers (hint to Harel to add to considerations next year!) would consider in the future to add some 'expert' non-representative slots when the topics on the agenda ask for that. Best, Lodewijk No dia 27 de Fevereiro de 2012 10:49, Anirudh Bhati <[email protected]>escreveu: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Alice Wiegand > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hi Harel, >> >> On 27 February 2012 08:02, Harel Cain <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Does anyone have a clear list of who was actually involved with MR and >> whose >> > participation should/must be provided for, and by whom exactly? >> >> No, that's why I've created >> >> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles/Working_group_meeting_2012-3-29 >> >> >> > My personal take here: have a meeting of MR people who are already at >> the >> > conference, and that's it. I find it rather difficult to justify paying >> from >> > donors' money for more people on top of that, for one more meeting in a >> > process that's basically approaching its final stage. Any other decision >> > must come with a commitment by some organization [WMF?] to bear the >> cost. >> >> That's why I've asked SJ about the budget. >> > > Thank you, Alice. We will need to know the decision on this so we can all > plan our month ahead. I personally have other commitments that I will have > to postpone if I am to make it there in time. :-) > > But I do believe that since we started this project, we need to conclude > it appropriately, and that will require participation from the core team of > contributors, and not just those who are incidentally present at the > conference. I think we need to be very clear on what ideas should and > should not be attributed to our work. > > In any case, I hope we all make it to the MR meeting, and in case a > decision to the contrary is to be made, I'd appreciate if it is > communicated to us soon. Thanks! > > anirudh > > _______________________________________________ >> Movementroles mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/movementroles >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Movementroles mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/movementroles > >
_______________________________________________ Movementroles mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/movementroles
