On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 6:16 AM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29 April 2013 09:33, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It's very clear (to me) that the WMF grants system is not designed to make
>> Wikimedia entities grow, but only to reinforce those which are already
>> strong enough, keeping them at the same level they're at.
> It's not clear this was a design criterion. It was, however, obvious
> that this was what would occur. When the chapters screamed blue murder
> about it on internal-l, Sue and Erik decided they didn't like the tone
> and weren't going to listen any more.
> Unfortunately, this doesn't make an actual problem go away.

That is interesting. And I think it is related to some questions I
made during the FDC meeting during the Wikimedia Conference. [1]

* (Tom - WMF) How will FDC find a balance between the money that will
go to organizations from the Global South (GS) and Global North (GN)
in the mid to the long term? It is well known the bad distribution of
formal groups in these two places, having a bigger concentration in

*(Tom - WMF) Measure of success: feedback to be parked. How to
distinguish the measure of success when it comes to different
backgrounds? Sometimes a small language Wikipedia can have a completly
different measure than the English version, for instance. How to
handle that? [TO BE ANSWERED LATER]

And the second question for me is really important for me based on my
experience working for almost 1,5 year for the catalyst program in

These questions were going to be answered on Sunday and after would be
added on meta.

P. S. again, internal-l discussions that should be public. Damn.

[1] http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/wmconf2013-fdc-process


Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more
useful than a life spent doing nothing."

Wikimedia-l mailing list
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Reply via email to