It costs time, Nkansah, not money. Of the two, time is more valuable when we are talking about volunteers, who have to respond to questions posted (not to mention misinformation that will inevitably also be posted), not just copy and paste messages. Any social media presence needs to be assigned to a knowledgeable volunteer for moderation. Keep in mind that the WMF as an entity employs people who are specifically tasked to maintain and moderate their various social media presences; Wikimania HK is largely volunteer-driven, and those few volunteers are organizing a major conference, with this just being a tiny sample of the tasks being done. If it takes an hour a week (a very conservative estimate), that's an hour that isn't spent on reviewing programming, or negotiating special hotel rates, or providing information on visas.
Should the Wikimania HK team decide that there's value in adding Google+ to their social media presence, I'll fully support their doing so: they're in the best position to understand their resources. If they don't, I'll fully support that too. Risker/Anne On 22 January 2013 16:51, Nkansah Rexford <[email protected]> wrote: > I wish to learn about how *much *(in $) it cost the managers of Wikimedia > Foundation and Wikipedia page on Google+ submit a single post. > > The instance of time and resources chipped into the act of having a page > on Google+, i think doesn't hold. How long will it cost the one posting > onto the fb and twitter platforms (in terms of time and energy) to copy, > paste and share that same post on Google+? > > I kind of feel surprised at how time and resources are raised as if its > gonna cost WMF 10s of 1000s of dollars to implement that. > > @James Wikimania DC had no presence on G+. At least, i think Wikimania HK > can break that record! > > The idea of api limitations etc, well, fine! how does that prevent > cross-platform posting? There are so many handy and easy-to-use tools > available to facilitate that, irrespective of Google not having one > themselves. In fact, if *there's the will, there's a way* > * > * > I guess, i kind of sense a bit of personal preference in these platforms > selection other than seeing them as they should be seen. Critically > looking, I can also say that cross posting onto twitter from fb is not > necessary since all (if not almost) the users on twitter who follow > Wikimania are on fb. > > i hope this issue is seen as it should, other than concentrating on > google's api's, and other factors, that to me, are baseless. > > On Tuesday, January 22, 2013, John Vandenberg wrote: > >> There is a $49 solution. >> >> http://www.nextscripts.com/google-plus-automated-posting/ >> >> And a free one >> >> http://code.google.com/p/socials-auto-poster/ >> >> John Vandenberg. >> sent from Galaxy Note >> On Jan 23, 2013 4:46 AM, "Daniel Schwen" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Unfortunately at this point the Google+ API is ''read-only''. So it is >>> not feasible to develop social media clients that automatically post >>> to Google+. I guess that is what Andrew et al meant. >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Nkansah Rexford >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > On Tuesday, January 22, 2013, Andrew Lih wrote: >>> >> >>> >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Jeromy-Yu Maximilian Chan >>> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> besides, I think the biggest problem is the Google + still didn't >>> open >>> >>> its API for sync post >>> >>> so usually, WMHK's messages are sync on Twitter and Facebook, but >>> google >>> >>> +... >>> >>> anyway we try to find a smart way to deal with that >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> This is basically the reason -- G+ doesn't play nice with others like >>> >> Facebook and Twitter. >>> >> >>> >> So besides being third to the race, they're also limiting their >>> exposure >>> >> by not providing an API. >>> >> >>> >> -Andrew >>> >> >>> > >>> > Not this kind of API you're looking for on a platform like google+? >>> What >>> > else you're looking for? >>> > https://developers.google.com/+/ >>> > >>> > So besides being third to the race, they're also limiting their >>> exposure by >>> > not providing an API. >>> > >>> > Are we the one not using the API , or they don't provide the API? >>> > >>> > Its just a point of correction though. ;) >>> > >>> > Putting all things said above aside, at least, just as >>> WMF/Wikipedia/some >>> > wiki chapters have got a g+ page, it will be nice for wikimania to >>> have one >>> > too. Whether g+ is lagging behind or is a loser, at least, they >>> deserve a >>> > wikimania page, at least. >>> > >>> > For an individual, i think its a personal preference to join g+. but >>> for >>> > wikimania, i think there's no excuse about that. >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > +Rexford | +Blender Academy >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > 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 >>> >> > > -- > +Rexford <https://plus.google.com/107174506890941499078> | +Blender > Academy<https://plus.google.com/b/103109918657638322478/103109918657638322478/posts> > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
