Something I would personally appreciate as an improvement, is a block of 2 hour around lunch with NO INTERNET! That ought to improve the mingling :)
Also speeddating seems to be an effective method (there are many ways to accomplish that). Lodewijk 2012/7/19 Katherine Casey <fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com> > I agree with Florence's comment about being sad that Wikimania is no > longer a giant meetup. For all that the talks and lectures are very > informative, I sort of wish that we had the GLAM track lecture, the Dev > track, the [whatever] track, *AND *the "I just want to hang out with > people" track. Give those of us who show up mostly because we want to meet > and talk to other Wikimanians a big room, and maybe a lot of beer or > snacks, and see what develops! We end up ad-hoc-ing this oftentimes by > using the ballroom, or the lobby, or whatever large space, but even those > are often set up in a way that makes me think it never occurred to anyone > that some of us would spend most of our time there if we could. Lack of > seating or enough outlets, the tendency Florence mentions for people to > clump off at tables by their affiliation, and lack of central location for > the hang-out space are some of the pitfalls I've noticed happening in the > past two wikimaniae. If I ran the world, every Wikimania would have a large > room full of abundant couches (not tables to sit around, and not rows of > chairs) and electrical outlets where people would be encouraged to just > hang out and meet new people. > > -Fluffernutter > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 5:57 AM, Florence Devouard <anth...@anthere.org>wrote: > >> https://wikimania2012.**wikimedia.org/wiki/Feedback<https://wikimania2012.wikimedia.org/wiki/Feedback> >> >> I dropped my comments over there. >> >> There are three things on which I would like to specifically insist upon >> >> The first is that I see a trend in seeing Wikimania as a "conference" >> rather than a sort of "giant meetup". I regret it. >> I was particularly sensible this year to the fact we had "factions". I >> could see the French speaking guys hanging together here. And the German >> chapter people hanging there. And in another corner the editing community >> of the English Wikipedia. And over there, the Glam people. And though there >> were naturally bridges between those groups, there was not much mixing and >> bonding. >> Seeing Wikimania as a conference is not really helping closing the gap. >> We get 4 or 5 sessions in parallel. Glam group goes there in the session >> related to Glam. Editing community goes there listening to the session >> related to arbitration. Chapter group here goes to listen to legal risks. >> And so on. The more sessions we have in parallel, the more chance that each >> group stick to its habits. >> Adding side events does not necessarily help. When wandering in the >> street, we could meet with a group of iberocoop people sticking together or >> a group of WMF staff members heading to that restaurant. Even the wikichix >> meeting could have been done differently. Such as giving the time to each >> women of ONE table to present to each other rather than all of us to each >> other. And making sure that women do not sit by their friends but with new >> women. >> The side meeting probably helping the most are actually visits (such as >> the visit to the Capitol) since these are smaller groups of various origins. >> But there is this tendency to group with people you already know because >> it is always tough to get to new people you know little about. >> In the past, I remember events that helped create more bonding. For >> example, sleeping in one area rather than dozen. For example, breaking a >> wikiball together. For example, hosting lightning talks in the main lobby >> all along the conference. >> I think we need to think of Wikimania more as a networking event than it >> is right now. And give more chance to isolated people to connect and more >> chance to groups to break and bridge with other groups. >> I hope there can be discussions on how to achieve that (looking at how >> networking groups do is a good direction) and that next year team will have >> that at heart. >> >> >> The second is that I was actually surprised to see the organizing team >> put itself so much "in the background". >> I did not feel very satisfied that the team was essentially listed on a >> slide at the beginning and end of the conference and that we see a group of >> people on stage during 1 mn at the closing. If only because I will hardly >> remember any of the team member besides James, Aude and Danny. James as the >> leader. Aude and Danny because I already know them. But others ? >> Unfortunately not. Their names were plastered on an slide (since I didnot >> know them, it did not help me to recognise their face afterwards). In a >> regular conference, this is normal. We just thank the organizers and give >> them a one minute fame. >> But at Wikimania, the team should be special. It should be leader and at >> the heart of the event. We should know who they are and at the end of the >> conference, I feel we should feel like hugging them like mad for what they >> did (or hate them :)). There are various ways to do that. Such as at least >> presenting each of them at the beginning so that we have a face in front of >> the name. Putting a big wall in the lobby with the face and name, their >> role, and their favorite food (or whatever). Setting up a 10 mn >> presentation at the beginning of the day. Having a contest with them on >> stage. A banner to sign. A tower in lego to destroy. Anything. >> >> >> The third is.... WMF board. The Q&A is a tradition; but I feel traditions >> ought to change sometimes. It probably made more sense to have a board Q&A >> when we had no staff at all. Now, the staff is providing one keynote (Sue) >> plus many talks (not far from half of Wikimania talks I think) and >> providing plenty of input during three days. So the board Q&A is getting >> boring and not very useful anyway. Plus, as I told Jay, the concept of >> having a WMF staff select and ask the questions is setting up a barrier, >> thus increasing the distance between board and wikimedians. To be fair, I >> find it odd that most wikimedians have next to no idea of what the >> individual board members think on a specific topic. And most answers to >> board does not succeed to fix that. It should be clarified if the goal of >> this "event" is to help members understand better what individual members >> think OR if it is to understand better board strategy OR if it is to better >> understand certain issues. But if these issues are operational in nature, >> the questions should go to staff, not board. >> I think it is time to have another format. I wonder if it might not make >> sense to rather select one hot topic per year and have board give their >> opinion on that very topic in details and with individual position rather >> than having them give short, bland answers to 10 random questions. >> >> >> Florence >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Wikimania-l mailing list >> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l<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 > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
