I also like several of Kerry's points. However, de-emphasizing international conferences in favor of national conferences will probably result in a more US-centric organization.
There is a huge difference between US people who travel outside their country, and those who don't. Getting ordinary US participants to Europe and Mexico (which are relatively close) on partial scholarships on a regular basis would make a big difference. With respect to the "Global South" (a term which I find somewhat unnatural): It is actually not all that uncommon for US people to react to their first trips to a poor country by coming home and attempting to start some sort of charity partnership, often through a church or community organization. You need scholarships to create the in-person, international contacts to make it possible for partners in the "Global South" to access the content about their countries that is held by institutions in the US and Europe. Even large institutions do not attempt to do all their collaboration over the Internet; they eventually send representatives to talk with each other in person. Kristin On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 12:41 AM, Romaine Wiki <romaine.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > I also agree with the points Kerry brings in. > > (As I have no experience with South America, Africa or Asia, I can only > speak of my experiences in Europe.) > > I do not think national conferences are the solution to this. For large > countries it can help. Also national conferences are certainly needed. But > in Europe we have many relatively small countries, and most countries have > their own language. Seeing the large number of participants at Wikimania > 2014 in London, there is a huge need in Europe for interaction between the > various language communities, which otherwise are not really connected > much, even while they live relatively close to each other. Therefore I > would suggest that there will come a continental conference in Europe (if > there is no Wikimania in Europe). > > Romaine > > 2015-08-02 6:03 GMT+02:00 Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>: > >> I like several of Kerry's points. >> >> I did mention to Luis at WMCON that it might be more cost-effective, and >> potentially higher impact for some participants, to put more emphasis on >> national (or thematic) conferences and less on the general Wikimania >> conference. >> >> Pine >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 8:55 PM, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raym...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I think you put your finger on a key point here. We have a large >>> community of “totally deserving people” but mostly get little/no >>> recognition of their contribution. >>> >>> >>> >>> Most organisations that rely on volunteers have a range of ways to >>> recognising their efforts. In the world of WMF, other editors can give you >>> a “thanks” or a barnstar/Wikilove but WMF itself does not seem to do much >>> to recognise volunteers. So when “totally deserving” people apply for a >>> Wikimania scholarship, of course people are going to see this as a chance >>> to be recognised by WMF for their contributions. As most of the “totally >>> deserving” will be unsuccessful in gaining a Wikimania scholarship, of >>> course they are going to feel it as “demotivating”, “unfair” and “likely >>> to reduce their contributions” as the surveying suggests. Sure there’s >>> disappointment at not going to Wikimania, but I suspect the bigger issue is >>> that the apparent lack of recognition of their contribution that comes as >>> part and parcel of it. And a standard rejection letter that says “We >>> appreciate your contribution, but alas there aren’t enough scholarships” >>> fall a little short on the “recognition” front! >>> >>> >>> >>> Perhaps if the WMF looked at ways of recognising the “totally deserving” >>> volunteers in other ways, then the Wikimania scholarships would not become >>> as big an issue. One example might be cheaper scholarships to attend a >>> national event (which also avoids visa issues) or funding towards hosting a >>> local event within their community at which their contribution can be >>> recognised among their peers. Announcing an award to them in their local >>> media might be something people might value. Others might like a trophy for >>> their mantelpiece suitably inscribed. I am sure others can think of more >>> ideas and I note that we may need different ideas for different communities >>> as what people value is different. For example, although the merchandise >>> giveaway is well-intended, >>> >>> >>> >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways/Nominations >>> >>> >>> >>> has anyone considered if short-sleeved thin T-shirts are something >>> everyone in the world sees as a recognition? What about the countries were >>> the arms are kept covered for modesty or sun exposure? What about the >>> countries where T-shirts are seen as a “low status clothes”? >>> >>> >>> >>> I also note that a return to partial scholarships would mean more people >>> were recognised wrt to Wikimania. The comment that the administration of >>> partial scholarships was too much work for WMF staff sends an unpleasant >>> signal about how WMF values its staff time relative to the time spent by >>> “totally deserving” volunteers. >>> >>> >>> >>> In summary, I think WMF has a problem with its “totally deserving” >>> volunteers feeling unappreciated which is much larger than Wikimania. Given >>> the cost and effort of running annual Wikimanias for a relatively small >>> number of people, perhaps they should be less frequent with other kinds of >>> events and forms of recognition using the equivalent cost and effort in >>> between in order to spread the “wikilove” a bit more widely? >>> >>> >>> >>> Kerry >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* wikimania-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: >>> wikimania-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] *On Behalf Of *Osmar >>> Valdebenito >>> *Sent:* Friday, 31 July 2015 11:24 PM >>> *To:* Wikimania general list (open subscription) < >>> wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >>> *Subject:* Re: [Wikimania-l] Fwd: Wikimania Scholarship >>> >>> >>> >>> The problem is myths and rumours will arise always in a process that is >>> not (and should not) be objective. We can't just give some >>> >>> It is a subjective process where you evaluate so many people, with >>> different backgrounds and different contributions. What is more important? >>> Founding a chapter or making 100,000 edits on English Wikipedia? 5,000 >>> edits on a smaller Wikipedia or 10,000 images on Wikimedia Commons? How do >>> we make also possible to bring people outside our movement or with very few >>> edits, but that are great promoting free knowledge? And how do we ensure >>> gender balance? Do we prioritize new attendents than can bring new ideas to >>> our movement or do we support experienced members that have a proven record >>> of great presentations and activities? >>> >>> When you have a very limited number of scholarships and a lot of great >>> applicants, every time you make a decision to give a scholarship to >>> someone, you are taking it from someone else. And usually, that other >>> person totally deserve it. So, even though the committees have tried to >>> have a balance of all these factors, someone will complain and consider it >>> not fair. General numbers will help to reduce these rumours, but they will >>> always come up again. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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
