There is no manipulation. The idea that someone could have befriended all of their reviewers every year for a decade is quite silly. I'm sorry that you didn't get a scholarship this year, but at this point there is not a useful conversation being had here.
If you think there is a problem, volunteer for the scholarship committee next year and help fix it! On May 19, 2017 10:28 PM, "praveenp" <me.prav...@gmail.com> wrote: > From here at local language community, we don't see any "significant > contributions" from regular scholarship recievers. As I said they are not > anymore sharing their Wikimania experience to local language community. > Scholarship committee may be unbiased, in that case they are vulnerable to > manipulation. People are perfectly able to manipulate them because of their > massive experience with them. Or may be they befriended large number > people from global community from thier exposure and experience, and thus > cause incognizant bias. > > I really don't want to raise usernames but user:viswaprabha get regular > scholarship atleast since last decade (2007?). It is recommendable in no > way, when most of other applicants never get the experience and exposure in > wikimania. > > Please don't add more obscurity to an already dark process by > not informing people about their application status after phase 1. As I > said earlier, I was able to understand my 2016 application was okay but > rejected only because of this notification culture. Such a notification > will l help people retire early from planning and preparation also. > > Praveen > > > On Saturday, 20 May 2017, Adrian Raddatz <ajradd...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee >> this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications >> in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things. >> >> First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded >> tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers >> that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their >> communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a >> reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people >> every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people. >> There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those >> circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly >> active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional >> applications for their scholarships. >> >> That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year, >> we introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would >> receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the >> playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't >> be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with >> this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of >> repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then >> use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing >> yourself to someone who has received a scholarship. >> >> Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for >> every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those >> applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected >> in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's >> guide to see specifically how these are marked (< >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_schol >> ars/Reviewer%27s_guide>). >> >> Regards, >> >> On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships: >>> >>> - the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher >>> standard than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe >>> 300 edits in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone >>> who's >>> made 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year) >>> - the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more >>> specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in >>> attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.) >>> - the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific >>> to Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, >>> knowledge >>> of some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects, >>> Wikidata), etc. >>> >>> >>> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than >>> once have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if >>> someone gets a scholarship more than once. >>> >>> >>> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago) >>> >>> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals >>>> are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that >>>> needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is >>>> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for >>>> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets >>>> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets >>>> told *"**sending emails like this one would >>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against." *ensures that no one >>>> ever questions the processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont >>>> get to go to another Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because >>>> its seen as having flaws and that to me needs to addressed. >>>> >>>> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the >>>> same person is that >>>> >>>> - they are active, they apply every year >>>> - they are good communicators and self promoters >>>> - they have the time capacity to attend every year >>>> - previous years application arent tested against current >>>> applications for repetitions >>>> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,... >>>> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to >>>> actual outcomes >>>> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the >>>> selections every year >>>> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to >>>> draw new applicants to the top >>>> >>>> >>>> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of >>>> gripe. Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the >>>> perception can we do things better... >>>> >>>> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.prav...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person >>>>> again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity >>>>> because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not >>>>> speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality? >>>>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote: >>>>> >>>>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's >>>>> eligibility in public like this. >>>>> >>>>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the >>>>> published selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would >>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is >>>>> not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of >>>>> the other applicant gets scholarship? >>>>> >>>>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as >>>>> false argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.prav...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1] >>>>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>, >>>>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain >>>>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants >>>>>> rejected >>>>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself >>>>>> (User:Praveenp) there. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias >>>>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same >>>>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using >>>>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast >>>>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally >>>>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like >>>>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship". >>>>>> >>>>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year >>>>>> I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship >>>>>> was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this >>>>>> issue >>>>>> in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get >>>>>> repeating scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether >>>>>> she >>>>>> represents Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of >>>>>> these scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent >>>>>> years. >>>>>> Then, what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for >>>>>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and >>>>>> experience global community? >>>>>> >>>>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised >>>>>> the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even >>>>>> pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, >>>>>> every >>>>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie >>>>>> Young >>>>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar >>>>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year! >>>>>> >>>>>> Could someone clarify? >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul >>>>>> y/006921.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Praveen Prakash >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> -- Luke // LFaraone >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wikimania-l mailing >>>>> listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> GN. >>>> President Wikimedia Australia >>>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra >>>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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
