Re: [Wikimania-l] Coming up with a new process for Wikimania selection

[James Forrester]

On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 01:59 Lodewijk  wrote:

> Did anyone do a calculation whether holding it in an expensive city (say,
> London) with cheaper flights actually /is/ cheaper than holding it in a
> cheap city in Asia (say, Delhi or Mumbai)? And then I don't mean WMF-budget
> wise, but total costs: including the costs by all affiliates, and the costs
> privately paid for by the volunteers. I recall being positively surprised
> that there was very little difference between India and Berlin for the
> chapters meeting...
>

I've been doing this regularly for years in an *ad hoc* way. It informed
the pick of areas. For example, the additional cost to the community of
hosting Wikimania in Australia is (very roughly) US$1k extra per person
from outside Oceania compared to the base cost, and US$1k less for each
person in Oceania. At typical levels of 800 non-local self-funded
attendees, of whom we have around 10 from Oceania, and 400 local people who
wouldn't otherwise come at all, This means an additional community cost of
~US$750k (and a bunch more for Wikimedia organisational funds, paid
directly from WMF or via the chapters) in return for the opportunity for
400 local Oceanians to attend who wouldn't otherwise have the opportunity.

This is, clearly, not a completely unacceptable additional burden, but it
is one we should take on carefully. By picking the venue for Wikimania we
are not just 'awarding' some locals, but demanding a great many community
people reach even deeper to try to attend, and for a great many, put it
beyond their financial reach. Though Wikimedia organisational funds pay a
huge amount for scholarships, almost entirely focussed on the
less-represented countries in our community, but this does not (and cannot
reasonably) cover the majority of attendees.

Off the top of my head, the numbers are roughly comparable for Latin
America (slightly less for Mexico), a bit lower for South Asia, Sub-Saharan
Africa, and Eastern Europe/Russia/Central Asia, and lower still for Asia
Pacific and the Middle East and North Africa. The numbers drift from year
to year a bit, but sadly there's not much impact on the overall headline
whilst the editing community is so unequally geographically distributed.

This is why we included the call to area to get into the practice of having
annual regional or sub-regional conferences. These would let a much larger
portion of our community more easily afford to come to an in-person
community event to share their passion, talk about what we can do to
improve the projects, and learn new things. This is what the Wikimedia
conferences, be they the global Wikimania or the regional "Wikimeetings"
(people should suggest a great name!), should be about.

J.
___
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Re: [Wikimania-l] Biggest disappointment from Wikimania 2017

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

It's indeed a pity that things were not announced sooner and better, but 
the whole point of the new system is to decide earlier and waste less 
volunteer time/nerves. If we dislike having losers, let's design a 
system where there are no losers instead of asking that other people be 
the losers. (See Iolanda's message.)


Nemo

___
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Re: [Wikimania-l] Biggest disappointment from Wikimania 2017

[WereSpielChequers]

But will there be fewer losers and less wasted effort under the continental 
rotation system? Under the set continent rotation system it won't be possible 
to bid one year, learn some lessons and bid the following year. You might get 
some overlap between bid teams three years apart, but I wouldn't plan on it. If 
we rotate by distance then an unsuccessful bid team would often have the option 
of bidding again the following year.

Regards

Jonathan 


> On 6 Oct 2015, at 07:06, Federico Leva (Nemo)  wrote:
> 
> It's indeed a pity that things were not announced sooner and better, but the 
> whole point of the new system is to decide earlier and waste less volunteer 
> time/nerves. If we dislike having losers, let's design a system where there 
> are no losers instead of asking that other people be the losers. (See 
> Iolanda's message.)
> 
> Nemo
> 
> ___
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

___
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Re: [Wikimania-l] Coming up with a new process for Wikimania selection

[Lodewijk]

Did you also consider the hotel costs etc in this calculation? I recall
that catering and hotel costs in India were so much cheaper that it
balanced out the additional flight costs for the chapters meeting - not sur
ehow that would work oout on this scale though.

Either way, it would be interesting to do this calculation somewhere on
meta, some day - and help people be aware of what we're talking about, It's
not an unimportant assumption/argument we work from :)

as a side note, of course I strongly support the regional conferences, and
I am thrilled to see that the WikiArabia conference is seeing a second
edition!

Lodewijk

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 4:35 PM, James Forrester 
wrote:

> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 01:59 Lodewijk  wrote:
>
>> Did anyone do a calculation whether holding it in an expensive city (say,
>> London) with cheaper flights actually /is/ cheaper than holding it in a
>> cheap city in Asia (say, Delhi or Mumbai)? And then I don't mean WMF-budget
>> wise, but total costs: including the costs by all affiliates, and the costs
>> privately paid for by the volunteers. I recall being positively surprised
>> that there was very little difference between India and Berlin for the
>> chapters meeting...
>>
>
> I've been doing this regularly for years in an *ad hoc* way. It informed
> the pick of areas. For example, the additional cost to the community of
> hosting Wikimania in Australia is (very roughly) US$1k extra per person
> from outside Oceania compared to the base cost, and US$1k less for each
> person in Oceania. At typical levels of 800 non-local self-funded
> attendees, of whom we have around 10 from Oceania, and 400 local people who
> wouldn't otherwise come at all, This means an additional community cost of
> ~US$750k (and a bunch more for Wikimedia organisational funds, paid
> directly from WMF or via the chapters) in return for the opportunity for
> 400 local Oceanians to attend who wouldn't otherwise have the opportunity.
>
> This is, clearly, not a completely unacceptable additional burden, but it
> is one we should take on carefully. By picking the venue for Wikimania we
> are not just 'awarding' some locals, but demanding a great many community
> people reach even deeper to try to attend, and for a great many, put it
> beyond their financial reach. Though Wikimedia organisational funds pay a
> huge amount for scholarships, almost entirely focussed on the
> less-represented countries in our community, but this does not (and cannot
> reasonably) cover the majority of attendees.
>
> Off the top of my head, the numbers are roughly comparable for Latin
> America (slightly less for Mexico), a bit lower for South Asia, Sub-Saharan
> Africa, and Eastern Europe/Russia/Central Asia, and lower still for Asia
> Pacific and the Middle East and North Africa. The numbers drift from year
> to year a bit, but sadly there's not much impact on the overall headline
> whilst the editing community is so unequally geographically distributed.
>
> This is why we included the call to area to get into the practice of
> having annual regional or sub-regional conferences. These would let a much
> larger portion of our community more easily afford to come to an in-person
> community event to share their passion, talk about what we can do to
> improve the projects, and learn new things. This is what the Wikimedia
> conferences, be they the global Wikimania or the regional "Wikimeetings"
> (people should suggest a great name!), should be about.
>
> J.
>
> ___
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
___
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Re: [Wikimania-l] Coming up with a new process for Wikimania selection

[Lodewijk]

OK, great that you like it - but what is your argument for it? I get the
arguments for measuring distance in flight cost rather than time, and I get
the reasoning that conferences shouldn't be too close together. But why
should a conference in China disqualify Australia? Or why should London
disqualify New York? Or even Moscow?

Before we start to come up with all kind of random reasonings: focus on the
basics please. We want the conference to cover multiple places, be
relatively as cheap as possible and also be fun to attend.

Did anyone do a calculation whether holding it in an expensive city (say,
London) with cheaper flights actually /is/ cheaper than holding it in a
cheap city in Asia (say, Delhi or Mumbai)? And then I don't mean WMF-budget
wise, but total costs: including the costs by all affiliates, and the costs
privately paid for by the volunteers. I recall being positively surprised
that there was very little difference between India and Berlin for the
chapters meeting...

Best,
Lodewijk

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:10 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:

> I like the idea of distance as measure to choose the next location, but
> that should also be coupled with a timezone  factor +- 6 hours at a minimum
> as well...
>
> Wikimania still needs a local group to volunteers who  understand the
> local language and customs, it needs their enthusiasm and energy to keep it
> on the front burner locally
>
> On 5 October 2015 at 16:33, WereSpielChequers  > wrote:
>
>>
>> I agree that we should make rotation explicit, but that doesn't need to
>> be done by region. We could achieve the same by requiring each bid to be a
>> long haul flight from the previous one, and  a medium haul flight from the
>> one before. Under the region proposal we could have Amman in Asia, Cairo in
>> Africa and Athens in Europe all within four years. Or El Paso, Texas  one
>> year and_Juarez, Chihuahua the next.
>>
>> I suggest that instead we make the rotation explicit by distance, 4000
>> miles from the preceding venue, 3,000 miles from the one before that, 2,000
>> from the one three years prior and 1000 from the one four years earlier. We
>> should also have a rule that prioritises countries that welcome such events
>> with a more open visa policy.
>>
>> Also if the Foundation wants to get better value for money, the venues
>> could be determined through a commercial evaluation looking for the best
>> value locations in the world regardless of whether or not there are locally
>> organised wikimedians. Then get the programme determined by global
>> volunteers. It wouldn't be too much of a burden on scholarship attendees if
>> they got an email with their flight details asking them to volunteer to
>> moderate or video a session.
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>> On 4 Oct 2015, at 21:57, Ralf Roletschek  wrote:
>>
>> Yes, thats right. +1
>>
>> 2015-10-04 22:55 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) :
>>
>>> What I like about the explicit rotation:
>>> * more transparency, the rotation is no longer an unwritten rule;
>>> * more time (2 years) to make Wikimania great, less volunteer time spent
>>> on (concurring) bids;
>>> * more concreteness and (hopefully) cooperation in the selection stage,
>>> less "let's beat continent X";
>>> * more pragmatism, recognising we can't always flight the biggest groups
>>> of people in the farthest places.
>>>
>>> Nemo
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Ralf Roletschek
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ralf_Roletschek
>> Fragen zum Fahrrad? - http://www.fahrradmonteur.de
>> Hinweis wegen immer mehr aufkommendem Werbemüll: Alle Mails, die die
>> Wörter "Faceb00k" oder "Twi††er" enthalten, landen bei mir ungelesen im
>> Spam.
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> GN.
> Vice President Wikimedia Australia
> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>
>
> ___
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
___
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Re: [Wikimania-l] Coming up with a new process for Wikimania selection

[John Mark Vandenberg]

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:57 AM, Lodewijk  wrote:
> ..
> as a side note, of course I strongly support the regional conferences, and I
> am thrilled to see that the WikiArabia conference is seeing a second
> edition!

When looking for parts of a new process for Wikimania selection, I
think it is worth building in a requirement that a 'regional'
conference has been held in the city, or at least the country, and was
successful at getting the locals ('casual' editors and non-editors
alike) to walk in the doors.

This would provide a clearer path towards hosting a Wikimania,
allowing a lower cost event to provide a testing ground of both the
organisers capabilities and local communities interest.

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Re: [Wikimania-l] Coming up with a new process for Wikimania selection

[Gnangarra]

very irony of all of this is that the Australian chapter had scheduled a
national-semi regional conference this past weekend but was that abandoned
when the funding request was decline

On 7 October 2015 at 08:11, John Mark Vandenberg  wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:57 AM, Lodewijk 
> wrote:
> > ..
> > as a side note, of course I strongly support the regional conferences,
> and I
> > am thrilled to see that the WikiArabia conference is seeing a second
> > edition!
>
> When looking for parts of a new process for Wikimania selection, I
> think it is worth building in a requirement that a 'regional'
> conference has been held in the city, or at least the country, and was
> successful at getting the locals ('casual' editors and non-editors
> alike) to walk in the doors.
>
> This would provide a clearer path towards hosting a Wikimania,
> allowing a lower cost event to provide a testing ground of both the
> organisers capabilities and local communities interest.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> ___
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>



-- 
GN.
Vice President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
___
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Re: [Wikimania-l] Biggest disappointment from Wikimania 2017

[Luca Martinelli]

015-10-06 9:12 GMT+02:00 WereSpielChequers :
> But will there be fewer losers and less wasted effort under the continental 
> rotation system?

IMHO yes. It is better to be 100% sure that a location WILL be chosen
for a particular event, instead of saying "well, we're bidding, so for
now we will book the place, and then we may confirm in $number
months". We also have to take into account that also venues have
managements, and a certain degree of certainty surely helps to lower
the costs: Economics teach that uncertainty is a cost, and every cost
is to be paid by the last link of the chain, which is the attendee.

Also, I want to make a direct reference to the Manila 2016 Committee:
if I have to think how should they feel right now after the 2016 bid
procedure, I'd put my money on the "pissed-off-as-a-venomous-snake"
option. And they have good reasons to be that pissed off, because
surely they put lots of efforts in it... and then all disappeared,
like magic.

I myself am kinda in a same position (I probably have to tell someone
that I have to cancel an event I was actually pushing hard to realise,
after three months of efforts and many changes to the schedule), so I
totally feel for them. And Iolanda too, which is on the "winning" side
of the 2016 bid procedure, knows it, this is why she explicitly said
that line about "no more losers, more concerting". Because such a
delusion may undermine your "faith" in the movement, and let you do
less, instead of more for it - and with good reasons. I'd totally,
totally understand such a decision.

In the end, this change IS about not wasting someone's efforts. I am
most of the time in favour of free competition, but free competition
sometimes doesn't allow for a "soft" conclusion, which in our case
would be the best solution not to alienate people who care and are
willing to work. See Gnangarra message for an example.

-- 
Luca "Sannita" Martinelli
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Sannita

___
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Re: [Wikimania-l] Coming up with a new process for Wikimania selection

[Gnangarra]

the idea is moving not just in distance but also in time that way travel
will be shared more equally the time shift creates new opportunities for
other people to access the event at low cost, ok 6 hours maybe too much but
o hours has a serious potential to introduce bias

the idea is to ensure that Wikimania isnt concentrated around Europe/North
America for an extended period ie London,  New York, Barbados, Paris,
Washington, Warsaw, Berlin, Toronto, Prague, Madrid, Boston

Australia would already be exculded for a number of years(at least 6) under
this new process if an event is held in China,if we going to dump a
transparent system for a rotation the rotation which is already bias needs
to ensure that their arent further failings that will divide the community

On 6 October 2015 at 16:58, Lodewijk  wrote:

> OK, great that you like it - but what is your argument for it? I get the
> arguments for measuring distance in flight cost rather than time, and I get
> the reasoning that conferences shouldn't be too close together. But why
> should a conference in China disqualify Australia? Or why should London
> disqualify New York? Or even Moscow?
>
> Before we start to come up with all kind of random reasonings: focus on
> the basics please. We want the conference to cover multiple places, be
> relatively as cheap as possible and also be fun to attend.
>
> Did anyone do a calculation whether holding it in an expensive city (say,
> London) with cheaper flights actually /is/ cheaper than holding it in a
> cheap city in Asia (say, Delhi or Mumbai)? And then I don't mean WMF-budget
> wise, but total costs: including the costs by all affiliates, and the costs
> privately paid for by the volunteers. I recall being positively surprised
> that there was very little difference between India and Berlin for the
> chapters meeting...
>
> Best,
> Lodewijk
>
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:10 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
>
>> I like the idea of distance as measure to choose the next location, but
>> that should also be coupled with a timezone  factor +- 6 hours at a minimum
>> as well...
>>
>> Wikimania still needs a local group to volunteers who  understand the
>> local language and customs, it needs their enthusiasm and energy to keep it
>> on the front burner locally
>>
>> On 5 October 2015 at 16:33, WereSpielChequers <
>> werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I agree that we should make rotation explicit, but that doesn't need to
>>> be done by region. We could achieve the same by requiring each bid to be a
>>> long haul flight from the previous one, and  a medium haul flight from the
>>> one before. Under the region proposal we could have Amman in Asia, Cairo in
>>> Africa and Athens in Europe all within four years. Or El Paso, Texas  one
>>> year and_Juarez, Chihuahua the next.
>>>
>>> I suggest that instead we make the rotation explicit by distance, 4000
>>> miles from the preceding venue, 3,000 miles from the one before that, 2,000
>>> from the one three years prior and 1000 from the one four years earlier. We
>>> should also have a rule that prioritises countries that welcome such events
>>> with a more open visa policy.
>>>
>>> Also if the Foundation wants to get better value for money, the venues
>>> could be determined through a commercial evaluation looking for the best
>>> value locations in the world regardless of whether or not there are locally
>>> organised wikimedians. Then get the programme determined by global
>>> volunteers. It wouldn't be too much of a burden on scholarship attendees if
>>> they got an email with their flight details asking them to volunteer to
>>> moderate or video a session.
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4 Oct 2015, at 21:57, Ralf Roletschek  wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, thats right. +1
>>>
>>> 2015-10-04 22:55 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) :
>>>
 What I like about the explicit rotation:
 * more transparency, the rotation is no longer an unwritten rule;
 * more time (2 years) to make Wikimania great, less volunteer time
 spent on (concurring) bids;
 * more concreteness and (hopefully) cooperation in the selection stage,
 less "let's beat continent X";
 * more pragmatism, recognising we can't always flight the biggest
 groups of people in the farthest places.

 Nemo


 ___
 Wikimania-l mailing list
 Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Ralf Roletschek
>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ralf_Roletschek
>>> Fragen zum Fahrrad? - http://www.fahrradmonteur.de
>>> Hinweis wegen immer mehr aufkommendem Werbemüll: Alle Mails, die die
>>> Wörter "Faceb00k" oder "Twi††er" enthalten, landen bei mir ungelesen im
>>> Spam.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list

Re: [Wikimania-l] Biggest disappointment from Wikimania 2017

[Paolo B.]

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Luca Martinelli 
wrote:

> 015-10-06 9:12 GMT+02:00 WereSpielChequers :
>
> Also, I want to make a direct reference to the Manila 2016 Committee:
> if I have to think how should they feel right now after the 2016 bid
> procedure, I'd put my money on the "pissed-off-as-a-venomous-snake"
> option. And they have good reasons to be that pissed off, because
> surely they put lots of efforts in it... and then all disappeared,
> like magic.
>
>
You are not far off the mark ;)

Personally (and not speaking on behalf of the rest of the Manila team), I
wouldn't mind, in principle, that the procedures for selecting the
Wikimania host is going to be changed for some welcome improvements.
(Although I have very strong reservations with the details, most of which
were aired by Josh before me).

However, if this was the intention all along, I hope that Ellie did not
have to tell Josh to tell the Manila team to restart our bid. At the time
we made our first bid, most of the prospective suppliers or partners said
that they would be available July-August 2016 and were even more than ready
to send us a contract on the spot (we had to explain that we're merely
putting a bid so we said that would have to wait). They are still available
and would be willing to pencil-book us should we win the 2017 bid. On my
part (and, I would surmise, Josh's), the time we've spent privately
reworking our bid could have been better spent in other tasks like
chapter/community work in Wikimedia Philippines.

If the changes to the procedure would have been effective for the 2018
bids, I would understand. However, we were never informed or warned that
changes were afoot, and up to this point, all of us---the Manila, Bali and
Perth bid teams---have started working on our bids in good faith, because
we never knew that the current process would be rescinded. And to make
things worse, the "winning" city for 2017 was not even one of the cities
which have put up a bid for 2017. This is probably one of the most
inconsiderate things I've ever experienced in my Wiki-life, and you cannot
blame me if we all felt betrayed and misled, despite and in spite of the
reassurances that have been said up to this point.

Now, how would I get ever back the time and effort I lost in reworking on
our planned 2017 bid?
___
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l