Ah, the downside of doing your work open and in public is that people see a half finished doodle of a budget and get overexcited and you come back to 45 emails in your inbox...
Yes, it's likely that the Wikimania 2014 London Bid Committee is going to be applying for a grant to help it put together a good bid, but we're still figuring out which roles are required and waiting for other inputs, so the numbers were really just placeholders for now. The deeper question I see here is - what sort of event does the community want Wikimania to be? It's a conference that is really beginning to come of age, and with this comes growing pains. From a 200 person glorified pubmeet it's become a five day long 1000+ person multi-track affair with all the attendant expectations on AV, travel logistics, social events, catering, multi-tiered accommodation... and unless it's not handled well, potentially a very frustrating experience for a lot of wikimedians who have invested their time and money travelling to take part. With the correct facilitating software, a lot of people have been able to collaborate together to build a killer encyclopaedia. Similarly, a well designed conference can allow for positive interactions between a very large number of people. As the size increases, the complexity increases, the risk increases, and the cost increases - but so do the possible benefits. Let us be clear: running an event this size is not cheap. A Wikimania costs hundreds of thousands of pounds, and probably significantly more in a place like London. Tickets to your average <http://www.websummit.net/get-tickets/> tech <http://www.leweb.co/register/paris> event<http://www.ted.com/pages/tedglobal>of a similar size and scope would easily cost £1000+ per delegate, and in comparison a Wikimania is basically free. This means that we need to do a lot more work fundraising, which takes a lot of time and planning, and a chief concern of potential sponsors is whether the event will be delivered to a professional standard. We are finding that a lot of the groundwork for the event has to be laid well before the bid process even starts. Not to sound patronising, but event organisation is different to wiki editing; there are deadlines which must be met, and mistakes that cannot be reverted. So let us ask ourselves, why should the community spend so much donor money on Wikimania (bids)? What is Wikimania there to achieve? WMF's policy on grants: > Grant requests should support the achievement of Wikimedia's mission and > strategic priorities. We favor high impact requests over low impact > requests; try to break new ground, and to increase your group's capacity > for new programs and partnerships. > Holding such a conference is high impact, breaks new ground, and fosters links to local institutions<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_museums_in_London>and builds relationships with sponsors and partners<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2013_bids/London#Partner_Organisations>. It's fantastic for encouraging innovation<http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Movement_Strategic_Plan_Summary/Encourage_Innovation>and with Jimmy on hand<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2014_bids/London#Supporters>courting the press it should be great for increasing awareness and participation<http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Movement_Strategic_Plan_Summary/Increase_Participation>too. It seems as good a thing to invest in as any - after all, if it didn't have community support, a thousand people probably wouldn't show up to it every year! Ed On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 9:14 PM, <[email protected]>wrote: > Send Wikimania-l mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Wikimania-l digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: UK budget plan for 2014 Wikimania bid (Joseph Fox) > 2. Re: UK budget plan for 2014 Wikimania bid (Theo10011) > 3. Re: UK budget plan for 2014 Wikimania bid (Thomas Morton) > 4. Re: UK budget plan for 2014 Wikimania bid (Joseph Fox) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 21:19:17 +0100 > From: Joseph Fox <[email protected]> > To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] UK budget plan for 2014 Wikimania bid > Message-ID: > < > cadbk8xcmsqdbssruwdkt16ttcopxt4vzch7m+rccbvw8elr...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > I understand this. But people here seem to have seen that they'll be making > up a financial plan for the event, then announcing that there is no raw > passion underneath the money. I'm just telling you that there are a *lot* > of > very active and very passionate Wikimedians in the UK looking to make the > best possible event. > > Also remembering that Brits are all tightfisted, of course, so they'll not > be silly with their money ;) > > (Also, James, my apologies for the assumption. I wonder if WMUK will be > able to negotiate such a discount...) > > Joe > > On 25 August 2012 21:15, Manuel Schneider <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > Am 25.08.2012 22:10, schrieb Joseph Fox: > > > To be honest I'm rather offended that the UK bid is being written off > > while > > > it's still 2014. I agree with you, but London is far from the cheapest > > city > > > in the world, as I'm sure you're aware - money will be required. > > > > from my experience on the Wikimania Jury I can assure you that it is > > pretty much taken into account how much Wikimania experience the bidding > > team has and how much the understand to make a Wikimania as Wikimania is. > > > > /Manuel > > -- > > Regards > > Manuel Schneider > > > > Wikimedia CH - Verein zur F?rderung Freien Wissens > > Wikimedia CH - Association for the advancement of free knowledge > > www.wikimedia.ch > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimania-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/attachments/20120825/1c222f87/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 01:53:52 +0530 > From: Theo10011 <[email protected]> > To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] UK budget plan for 2014 Wikimania bid > Message-ID: > < > cap9+r94o+o76p2npswl6vly9frxbrv3f-alm_jrvrufgtdq...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Joseph Fox <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Would would money even buy at the bidding stage? Absolutely nothing, > > unless you count the venue? > > > > When did the DC team book their venue? How much was it? (Guessing they > got > > it for nothing, but probably wrong) > > > > > I'm not sure I follow, but, your assumption here is that the amount would > pay for the venue, even before it is decided which city would host the > conference? Again, wouldn't every bidding city needed to be afforded the > same privilege? or is there actually a reason why the UK bid would be > special? > > Do I really need to point to Meta and every past wikimania budget, which > hardly ever required an upfront amount for the venue, even before a venue > was decided, or a bid was considered. > > Regards > Theo > > > > > Joe > > > > On 25 August 2012 21:10, Theo10011 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I am surprised at the reaction here. Is it so necessary for UK to have a > >> bid or a winning bid at that, that you are willing to break convention, > and > >> spend this huge amount on a paid bid. > >> > >> This is unfair. I don't know the history about the bidding process, but > >> bids that I saw were written by volunteers, some with or without a > chapters > >> support, or even knowledge in some cases. What about competing bids, > since > >> they can't afford to hire a team to just make a bid that won't be on > equal > >> footing, should they just not bother? or ask for the same grant? > >> > >> What if the UK still loses the bid? that would be donor money down the > >> drain. If WMUK members personally finance this, it is one thing, but > using > >> this much money raised in the name of Wikipedia, to finance a bid for a > >> single chapter to host the annual volunteer-run conference, seems very > >> irresponsible, and antithetical to the entire spirit of a volunteer-run > >> event. > >> > >> Regards > >> Theo > >> > >> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 1:12 AM, Thomas Dalton <[email protected] > >wrote: > >> > >>> On 25 August 2012 20:28, Itzik Edri <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > Sorry, it's undiplomatic to interfere with others budget plans - but > I > >>> just > >>> > can't ignore how the future of Wikimania will look like if others > will > >>> > follow UK plans to invest ?40,000 only for the bid process (about > >>> 62,000$). > >>> > >>> To be clear, that plan is still in draft, and that particular item has > >>> received plenty of opposition. > >>> > >>> I am in favour of spending money on bids - it is necessary if we want > >>> to get professional quality bids. I am not in favour of spending that > >>> kind of money on bids, though. > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Wikimania-l mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimania-l mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimania-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/attachments/20120826/f1702d12/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 21:25:04 +0100 > From: Thomas Morton <[email protected]> > To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] UK budget plan for 2014 Wikimania bid > Message-ID: > <CAKO2H7_FHWo8mFiO= > [email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On 25 August 2012 21:13, Nathan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Joseph Fox <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > >> To be honest I'm rather offended that the UK bid is being written off > >> while it's still 2014. I agree with you, but London is far from the > >> cheapest city in the world, as I'm sure you're aware - money will be > >> required. > >> > >> Joe > >> > >> > > Who said it should be written off? I just think that if the bid is > > developed by a professional with a big budget, > > > > That's not a good way to describe the situation. I was unaware which list > we were talking on - assuming that it was the UK discussion list where > people are aware of the setup we have. > > rather than by actual Wikimedians, that's an indication that (as Tom Morton > > suggested) there isn't an active group of Wikimedians who support it. > > > > Far from it; there are a lot of active Wikimedians deeply involved in the > process. But, as noted, volunteers tend to flit around and miss deadlines > :) > > Ed, who is the guy involved, has put a lot of his own (volunteer) time in > so far - he is reallyu into the process, and brings experience and > contacts. > > But this is really a little too specific for a public list. I'd welcome a > discussion about bid budgets etc. but without reference to one (of several) > entirely undecided budget idea. > > Tom > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/attachments/20120825/f7ad6092/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 21:31:14 +0100 > From: Joseph Fox <[email protected]> > To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] UK budget plan for 2014 Wikimania bid > Message-ID: > <CADbK8Xc= > [email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > I'm sorry, guys, I think I'm guilty of not reading up properly on this - > apparently the ?40,000 is just for the *bid*? Clarification from someone at > WMUK please? > > I think surely that's an estimate on total cost that's been misquoted... > > Joe > > On 25 August 2012 21:25, Thomas Morton <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On 25 August 2012 21:13, Nathan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Joseph Fox <[email protected] > >wrote: > >> > >>> To be honest I'm rather offended that the UK bid is being written off > >>> while it's still 2014. I agree with you, but London is far from the > >>> cheapest city in the world, as I'm sure you're aware - money will be > >>> required. > >>> > >>> Joe > >>> > >>> > >> Who said it should be written off? I just think that if the bid is > >> developed by a professional with a big budget, > >> > > > > That's not a good way to describe the situation. I was unaware which list > > we were talking on - assuming that it was the UK discussion list where > > people are aware of the setup we have. > > > > rather than by actual Wikimedians, that's an indication that (as Tom > >> Morton suggested) there isn't an active group of Wikimedians who support > >> it. > >> > > > > Far from it; there are a lot of active Wikimedians deeply involved in the > > process. But, as noted, volunteers tend to flit around and miss > deadlines :) > > > > Ed, who is the guy involved, has put a lot of his own (volunteer) time in > > so far - he is reallyu into the process, and brings experience and > contacts. > > > > But this is really a little too specific for a public list. I'd welcome a > > discussion about bid budgets etc. but without reference to one (of > several) > > entirely undecided budget idea. > > > > Tom > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimania-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/attachments/20120825/d9cb5a42/attachment.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimania-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > > > End of Wikimania-l Digest, Vol 77, Issue 15 > ******************************************* >
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
