I read the whole thread quickly and I'll admit rather superficially. I don't want to get into the whole global politics issue again or to hold a competition of who was the most productive member of MR, I just need to be a petty clerk here and just ask a very practical and very immediate question: * who needs to be at the meeting and is currently not paid for, and who in that case is going to pay for his/her attendance. In other words: * of the X people who went ahead without ever being formally encouraged to so and registered for the conference with MR as the justification, who is WMDE as a host going to reject and who to accept?
Any potential money here is not mine - it's either WMF's or WMDE's or owned by some organization and it's not for me to decide. I already told you my personal recommendation - there are enough people already meant to be at the conference to hold an effective MR meeting, even if it the quorum is not full (so what? was it ever full?). May I suggest that Sj specify who he thinks is important enough to the process so as to bring him in specially for that - and then WMF and WMDE will need to decide if they want to fund this. Harel On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 18:36, Bence Damokos <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > This thread is getting a bit hostile and offensive again, and I feel that > some people somehow feel entitled to a trip to a concluding meeting. This > shouldn't be the right attitude (both on the perspective of personal > entitlement and having meetings for meetings' sake). > > Let us remember, that the original goal of the group was to come up with > recommendations (a "charter") that would be accepted by both the WMF Board > and chapters. The group was meant to facilitate a wider discussion and > synthesize some concrete recommendations that would be accepted by all. > This was one of the reasons that the original core groups was expanded to > include everyone who was ready to roll back his sleeves and provide some > work towards this end. > > In this regard, it is less important whether some recommendations > represent the collective view of all the dozens of people who at one time > contributed or thought they would contribute or whether they represent the > collective view of those half a dozen people who actually took the time to > work on them and that are later found worthy to accept by the wider > community. > > Personally, I have not been very active in the movement roles process, so > if I wasn't in Berlin, flying me in for just this meeting would not be the > best possible way of spending donor money (even if MR is a very worthy > cause to spend money and resources on). There are a number of people, both > those who will happen to be in Berlin and some that would not necessarily > be there, who their continued contribution have been invaluable to the MR > process, and therefore whose attendance at a possible meeting would be a > good investment in donor money. > > As has been noted, there is going to be a Chapcom meeting at the same > time, so some of the members of the MR group would be unable to attend. I > think it would be worthwhile to see who will be there in Berlin and whether > they can form one or small concentrated working groups to finish the work > that will be happening online (involving everyone) in the few weeks leading > up to Berlin. If it turns out that one or two of the active participants > would not be in Berlin, it would make sense to fly them in; but I don't > think that – without a set agenda and ideas of what the larger group would > discuss that can't do online – flying in everyone makes sense. > > Best regards, > Bence > > P.S. Please stop attacking WM DE, they are already doing a very huge > service to the movement by hosting and sponsoring the event (and to a > smaller degree, contributing to the costs of the Chapcom meeting). It is > inconceivable that they would have any financial responsibility or > obligation for funding the MR meeting just by placing an empty section on > an unofficial list of participants. It is up to as MR to convince either > the WMF or WM DE or the other chapters that our travel costs should be > funded. > P.P.S. While the majority of posts on the chapters-l list might have > leaned in one direction, it might not have expressed the majority opinion > of every participant. (Although, those who expressed their opinion were > quite strongly standing by them and certainly represented a bigger group.) > > _______________________________________________ > Movementroles mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/movementroles > > -- Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
_______________________________________________ Movementroles mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/movementroles
