We're going a bit too fast here :) Yes, there are things to be improved when it comes to the jury process - I agree on that with Tomasz. However, I don't agree on the specifics. But Most importantly: this is not the time yet to discuss that. If we start hammering out these details now, we get in trouble later - lets do things in the right order, and get the participating countries on board first. Thén we can have a decent discussion about jury etc. Last year we had this discussion at our May meeting in Berlin, and I thought that timing was excellent. So lets wait until then with discussing that in detail - and just conclude for now there are things to be improved. It is unfair to the countries that will want to participate, but are not ready to do so *yet* (because they follow a time line ending in September 2012), if we start making decisions like this already.
Lodewijk No dia 12 de Dezembro de 2011 22:02, Mike Dupont < [email protected]> escreveu: > Well this is why we should have prize money. > I would be willing to even donate a small amount for prizes for kosovo > if it was tax deductable (in germany where I live). > mike > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Strainu <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2011/12/12 Jan Ainali <[email protected]>: > >> 2011/12/12 Maarten Dammers <[email protected]> > >>> > >>> > 2011/12/12 Yaroslav M. Blanter<[email protected]>: > >>> >> I think this is a good direction, but I can not support the > proposal in > >>> >> this form. What if we have just one crappy image? What if we have > the > >>> >> image > >>> >> of the exterior, would we need the image of the interior? What if we > >>> >> have > >>> >> several monuments under one code? > >>> > >>> Let's put it a bit stronger. I would never support such a proposal. I > >>> support positive steering ("we encourage you to upload photo's of > >>> monuments that not yet have a (good) picture"), not negative steering > >>> ("WLM2011 we limit the eligible monuments to those without an image"). > > > > Then you're bound to encounter the same kind of criticism as this year. > > > >> Yes, I agree that positive steering is better. We could have one of the > >> judging criteria to be uniqueness or value adding, and explain that when > >> images are similar in other criterias, the ones that bring in new > aspects to > >> Commons will be regarded higher. > > > > What you want (and what people are saying on these pages) is a Commons > > contest, not a photo contest. That is, with a Wiki(p|m)edia jury and > > all. You can't reasonably expect to have professional photographers in > > the jury and ask them to rate based on the utility for a certain site. > > > > This would be a big step backwards from this year's contest in my > > opinion and a huge failed opportunity for a lot of content to be > > freed. I'm fairly sure many photographers will be reluctant to > > participate with hi res images. > > > > Strainu > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu > > > > -- > James Michael DuPont > Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >
_______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
