Pine, I’m going to echo Lodewijk here on emphasizing investing in the community and also call into question the wisdom of portraying $600,000 of Wikimania cost as being comparable to hiring four WMF engineers. If you think about how much Wikipedia/Wikimedia’s brand equity is (most certainly in the billions of dollars), or the overall budget of WMF (tens of millions of dollars), a six figure amount to enable, maintain and inspire our volunteer community to do more, it is an extreme bargain and an excellent return on investment.
I had a conversation with Deror Avi of WM Israel, and he described how they account for volunteer time as “in kind donations” for the purposes of their chapter output and showing impact. If we do the same conservative calculation with, say, 600 volunteers who attend Wikimania on scholarship or organically, who might then “donate” 250 hours a year (~5 hours/week), and consider that donated time worth, on average, about $20/hour (probably too low), that works out to $3 million in returns. This is, of course, a back of the napkin calculation. However, the order of magnitude is significant. You’re roughly looking at a 5x return on what WMF spends to stage Wikimania, and I’d argue with less conservative numbers, 10x is not unreasonable. This is not even taking into account the “pied piper” effect of training and evangelism at Wikimania having a multiplier effect far beyond individual training of attendees. It’s through Wikimania that folks like Liam Wyatt have created and furthered the GLAM movement, or Vassia Atanassova has infected people with 100 Wikidays, or people doing amazing things wits Wikidata have been able to feed off each other. Looking at it this way I’d argue, “How can we, in good conscience, *not* spend $600,000 on our community?” Perhaps one problem is that these types of benefits are so obvious to most Wikimania attendees, but fairly unknown to those who haven’t been, or rarely attend. If it’s useful, as someone on the Wikimania Committee, I’d like to try to surface more experiences and opinions to get a better overall picture of the net benefit of Wikimania for our movement. I’d welcome any and all ideas on how we can best do that. -Andrew -Andrew Lih Associate professor of journalism, American University Email: [email protected] WEB: http://www.andrewlih.com BOOK: The Wikipedia Revolution: http://www.wikipediarevolution.com PROJECT: Wiki Makes Video http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: > Agreed. I think that more data would be useful, including information such > as what you highlighted here. I'd also be interested in projections of > total attendance and costs (including travel costs and staff time) for > Wikimania vs. having more or expanded national and regional conferences. > > There's a substantial financial cost to all of this. It looks like the > cost for Wikimania 2016, including scholarships, was about $500,000 > excluding WMF and affiliate staff time, staff travel expenses, and expenses > for those who paid their own flights. Ellie might be able to provide us > with a better estimate of the total cost with those numbers included; my > guess is that it was around $600,000, which is substantial. WMF might be > able to hire four full-time engineers for a year for that amount. If WMF > and the community are going to spend that much money every year on an > annual conference, with the majority of that money coming from donors who > give small-dollar amounts, I think that we need to think carefully and > thoroughly about how we plan the conference (or conferences) to align with > the goals of our donors and what we tell our donors. I believe that there > is value in having face-to-face meetings and presentations; what isn't > clear to me is whether the current Wikimania model should be continued or > whether those funds would be better invested in regional and national > conferences. I'm hoping that a careful analysis can be done that provides > us some guidance about how to optimize our use of these financial resources. > > Pine > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Deryck Chan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I find it a bit over the top too to have such a letter, so strongly >> worded, and signed by so many board chairs. >> >> It reveals a divide between those who participated in the IdeaLab >> survey[1] and those who were at the Future of Wikimania session in Esino. >> >> It would perhaps be interesting to see if correlations can be revealed as >> to what demographic of Wikimedian prefer 1 year per Wikimania and what >> demographic prefer 2 year per Wikimania - like geographical distribution, >> involvement in local Wikimedia groups (staff / board / other volunteer / >> not a participant), and past attendance at regional Wikimedia conferences >> and Wikimania. >> >> [1] >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New_Wikimania/Outcomes >> >> Thank you. I find it confusing that the letter starts with "The >> chairpersons of the Wikimedia chapters state that Wikimania needs to be >> arranged every year," which implies that all of the chapter chairs are >> united in agreement, but it appears several chapters didn't sign the >> letter. Looking further at the content of the letter, I would have some >> questions about some of the statements that were made there. In the future, >> I would encourage chapter chairs to have discussions about matters such as >> this on the Affiliates mailing list so that we can have more inclusive >> discussions among more affiliates before sending letters like that. The >> Wikimania situation is already convoluted, and I believe that letters such >> as this should get fuller discussion among affiliates before they are sent >> to WMF. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Pine >> On Jul 8, 2016 20:04, "Christophe Henner" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> My bad I forgot it already is on meta >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters/Statements/Chapter_chairs_statement:_Wikimania_needs_to_be_arranged_every_year >>> Le 9 juil. 2016 4:50 AM, "Pine W" <[email protected]> a écrit : >>> >>> Thanks Christophe. I, for one, have had difficulty figuring out what is >>> going on with Wikimania in regards to varying decisions in different parts >>> of WMF and the community, so I look forward to the clarifications. >>> >>> Personally I am currently neutral on the decision of whether to have >>> annual Wikimanias, or alternate Wikimanias with years in which there is >>> emphasis on national or regional conferences. My hunch is that some >>> research about costs and benefits is needed so that we have reliable data >>> about a variety of scenarios before making a decision. >>> >>> Thanks again for working on this. >>> >>> To the board chairs: I would be interested in seeing that letter. In the >>> spirit of transparency, would you please publish it on Meta? As you know I >>> am an advocate for much more transparency from WMF, and I would like for >>> the affiliates to also to be transparent about governance matters such as >>> this one. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Pine >>> On Jul 8, 2016 19:18, "Christophe Henner" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> The same question was raised to the board a few days ago by chairs of >>>> Wikimedia organizations asking Foundation's board to make sure there's a >>>> comprehensive decision on this very topic. >>>> >>>> The chairs letter wasn't public, I let them share it on meta or here if >>>> they want to :) >>>> >>>> First step, in my opinion, is to set expectations and define the scope >>>> (in the role of the event but also in the ressources (both human and >>>> financial) we commit to the event. >>>> >>>> Katherine is working with the staff to provide groundings. >>>> >>>> Here is the answer I provided them with. >>>> >>>> ---- >>>> >>>> Hi chairs! >>>> >>>> First of all, thank you with the email, the feedback is clearly useful >>>> and raises interesting point. >>>> >>>> Now, the Wikimania discussion definitly is on the table. Living by what >>>> we said during Wikimania, we, as WMF, will make sure we end up with a clear >>>> answer to your questions but also to the different points you raise. >>>> >>>> Wikimania is an important time in our movement, but as you said it also >>>> comes with costs and challenges that we have to adress. Katherine is going >>>> to meet in the coming days with the staff in charge of that topic to start >>>> that discussion within WMF and provide groundings for a comprehensive >>>> decision. >>>> >>>> We will try to be as diligent as possible on that topic, but I would >>>> ask you to keep in mind that as we're in a transition phase and that might >>>> take a little more time than you could expect. >>>> >>>> Again thank you for your email, I love the fact that he raises issues >>>> but also includes the challenges we have to take care of :) >>>> >>>> We'll get back to you as soon as possible to continue that discussion. >>>> >>>> Have all a really great day / night :) >>>> >>>> Christophe >>>> >>>> While I concur with Coren’s conclusion, I’ll try to neutrally report on >>>> the events at Wikimania which led to this result. :) >>>> >>>> Full disclosure: I’m a fan of Wikimania being yearly, and was asked to >>>> serve on the Wikimania Committee after Esino Lario. I was also the main >>>> moderator of the Wikimania 2016 session on the “Future of Wikimania.” These >>>> views are my own, and not anything official from the committee. >>>> >>>> Background: Many folks (I’d say a majority) who I talked to in Esino >>>> Lario early in the conference thought that the decision to do Wikimania >>>> every other year was a done deal, as a result of the IdeaLab consultation. >>>> I told them that might not necessarily be so. The vote was close, not >>>> particularly widely known, and we could still be heard. Chris Schilling >>>> from the WMF, who oversaw the Idealab consultation, sought me out >>>> specifically at the start of the conference and to my delight, said that >>>> the consultation was “just another data point,” and that it was by no means >>>> the final word on things. Obviously, this was good news to people who were >>>> interested in keeping a yearly Wikimania. >>>> >>>> I was scheduled to moderate the “Future of Wikimania” discussion >>>> session [1] at the very end of the conference, and encouraged people to let >>>> their views be heard. It was under these conditions that we entered into >>>> the final discussion room and I asked Chris Schilling to give an opening >>>> statement to the room. Most people were happy to hear him say that it was >>>> “just another data point.” During the discussion, there was overwhelming >>>> support to keep Wikimania going every year, which is not a surprise >>>> considering this was *at* Wikimania. I encourage folks to peruse the >>>> Etherpad notes, which are quite extensive and expertly done by several >>>> folks there. >>>> >>>> Some views I’d highlight: >>>> - Having yearly Wikimania is important to keep the momentum of the >>>> movement going, according to many >>>> - A case for cancelling yearly Wikimania was to encourage/fund regional >>>> meetups. However, there is no guarantee that those regional meetups would >>>> actually take place, or that WMF would necessarily take the money saved >>>> from Wikimania to fund them. Some folks from Asia specifically said that >>>> there is weaker linguistic, cultural and geographic synergy for an “Asian” >>>> conference like there is in Europe and Africa, which is why it has been >>>> hard to do one. >>>> - One person noted that one trip to Wikimania served the same role as >>>> several international trips to get the same benefit from meeting other >>>> Wikimedians/developers, so there are indeed cost efficiencies in having a >>>> central conference. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://wikimania2016.wikimedia.org/wiki/Discussions/The_future_of_Wikimania >>>> [2] https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Wikimania2016-discussion7b >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -Andrew Lih >>>> Associate professor of journalism, American University >>>> Email: [email protected] >>>> WEB: http://www.andrewlih.com >>>> BOOK: The Wikipedia Revolution: http://www.wikipediarevolution.com >>>> PROJECT: Wiki Makes Video >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Marc-Andre <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 2016-07-08 10:01 AM, Chris Keating wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Interestingly, I couldn't see any sign of the Committee's decision >>>>>> being informed by the WMF's consultation on the future of Wikimania, or >>>>>> anyone from the WMF's community engagement department being present. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Wikimania is, and always was, a community led and organized event. The >>>>> WMF, as its traditional biggest sponsor[1], has a great deal of influence >>>>> in the matter - but ultimately no decision power beyond "fund and resource >>>>> or not". >>>>> >>>>> The committee's decision has indeed taken into account the >>>>> consultation you refer to - as well as the roundtable discussion on the >>>>> "Future of Wikimania" that took place earlier[2]. Our evaluation, which >>>>> is >>>>> reflected in that resolution, is that the consultation was clearly flawed >>>>> and that its conclusion does not reflect consensus - neither of the >>>>> community members who organize nor of those who attend Wikimania. >>>>> >>>>> -- Coren / Marc >>>>> >>>>> [1] Although "underwrite" might be a better term - the WMF has pretty >>>>> much shouldered the vast majority of the costs and given the most >>>>> logistical support year in and year out. >>>>> >>>>> [2] Where the consensus was to overwhelmingly reject that >>>>> consultation's conclusion in favor or continuing with Wikimania as a >>>>> yearly >>>>> even given its irreplaceable role in our movement. >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
