Hi Stephan, you're absolutely right. That's why the committee this year has started penalizing repeat recipients on the points scoring - if they just got one, then they will be less likely to get one in the next year. Their reports from past years are also evaluated, and if they did not fill them in well, then that will cause a serious points deduction for them. See the guide I linked to a few emails up for specifics here.
I certainly don't mean to dismiss this entire subject. There is certainly a question of whether we should do more to prevent repeat funding. But I think that conversation needs to be had apart from specific cases, and with a clear focus on the institutions of selection and what actual effects any changes would bring. Adrian Raddatz On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Stephan Schulz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 20 May 2017, at 07:36, Adrian Raddatz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 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! > > There is, of course, a legitimate question if each committee blindly > choses from > the current pool of applicant without looking into history, or if there is > some > institutional memory that will ensure a wider spread of accepted > applications. > > In the first case, it is not unlikely that someone who wrote a good > application once > and who otherwise fits the criteria will have a good chance one year later. > > In the second case, one could give bonus points for first-time applicants, > or forbid > application immediately after one success, or have an arbitrarily complex > system of > awarding handicap scores based on recent successful applications. > > I’m personally on the fence - a scholarship may be the only chance for > some people > to attend, so spreading them widely seems to be fair. On the other hand, > repeat > visits help to build more lasting relationships. > > But I do think this is a question that should have an explicit answer > either way. > > Bye, > > Stephan > > -- > ------------------------------ It can be done! > --------------------------------- > Please email me as [email protected] (Stephan Schulz) > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
