I think the biggest challenge here is that there are dozens of movement members who would be interested in attending this conference, but it is intended to be a very limited one. Several of the topics (Conflict of Interest, Meet the Trustees, Lessons learnt on huge projects, How to measure blood, sweat and tears, and particularly Reimagining movement structures) are of interest to a much, much larger community than simply the chapters/Thorgs. I'm still a bit baffled at having a session devoted to Wikimania, since almost all of the attendees of the conference will be attending Wikimania.
Indeed, if others besides the 2+1 representatives from chapters/thorgs are permitted to attend, I would strongly urge that any additional seats/participants be focused on movement members who work *outside* of the formal structures. It's pretty hard to come up with community-based reimaginations of movement structures if you exclude those who aren't already involved in existing movement structures. :-) The WMF umbrella of projects, chapters, thorgs etc has not done a lot in terms of leadership development. I'll note, however, that the place where leadership is most sorely lacking is on projects, while the majority of those participating in leadership activities at the chapter/thorg level are not doing a lot of work on WMF projects. (That's a generalization, and there are exceptions.) It may be that either this conference needs to be refocused, or it needs to be split into two separate conferences. There is definitely an audience out there for many of these same topics which is being ignored completely. Risker/Anne On 2 April 2014 08:32, Jens Best <jens.b...@wikimedia.de> wrote: > But if people who think that the 2+1-rule is questionable with good > arguments can't come to the conference because of the 2+1 rule the whole > thing becomes a bit difficult. Not everybody is keen on discussing such > things on mailinglists, especially when the decisions aren't made on such > lists, but on the conference itself. > > I for my case really would have liked to come, mainly for listening live to > the discussions and get to know some people from other chapters. And as I > this year live in the city where the conference takes place, it would have > been possible with very few costs, too. > > I really would like to see this aspect of the rules to be discussed on this > year's event because I also think that more people will represent the > bigger variety of the movement and still don't boost the event to a > happening where no serious discussion and fair international > decision-finding can be made because of overcrowding or overrepresentation > of some chapters. > > Have a nice time in Berlin, maybe I will drop by on some of the evening > events at least. :) > > > Best regards > > Jens > > > 2014-04-02 13:37 GMT+02:00 Itzik Edri <it...@infra.co.il>: > > > I less think this is question of budget (also, and I'm one of the big > > criticizers of the movement travels expenses), and rather the question of > > the concept of the conference. > > > > Yes, people can achieve a lot from attending in conferences - and we > don't > > limit the number of people who can come to Wikimania, but ChapConf is not > > Wikimania. It's another concept of conference, that happens every year > with > > the same formula of representatives. If people think we need to change > it, > > due the changes the movement passed over the past years, it's totally OK > > and we are welcome to do so - but we should speak about it - together, no > > by one side decision that haven't been notified to no one, at least no > > publicly. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Steve Zhang <cro0...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi Gerard, > > > > > > My email is not to criticise the decision WMUK made to send more than > the > > > majority of chapters, but to make my view (as I was asked off list my > > > view, and I think given the discussion it was worth sharing on-list) > that > > > regardless of whether the funds a chapter or organisation has at it's > > > disposable are infinitely small or infinitely limitless, the same > thought > > > process should be gone through when planning expenditure. Spend each > > $1,000 > > > like it's your last, essentially, consider if what it's planned to be > > spent > > > on is the best value, and whether there would be more value in spending > > it > > > on another project/item. When thats the case, then consider whether the > > > original proposed spending is worth it. > > > > > > I recognise this hardly a universal view, nor do I expect others to > > replace > > > their view with mine. It's not my place to question the actions of > board > > > members of other chapters, nor will I do so, but like others I felt > that > > > now was an appropriate time to convey my point of view on spending in > > > general, and I have now done so. > > > > > > Looking forward to seeing all of you in Berlin :) > > > > > > Steve > > > > > > > > > On 2 April 2014 21:54, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hoi, > > > > There is a big difference between being frugal and being effective. > > There > > > > is no point to underspend when it affects effectivity in a negative > > > manner. > > > > Yes, it is important that people are mindful of the sources of the > > money > > > > involved. This is as important for us as it is for a government where > > the > > > > donations are not given voluntary. More important as it is hardly > > > possible > > > > to get an accounting from "civil" servants and we rely every year on > > > > donations. > > > > > > > > When one chapter has a budget and a plan, it is for them to exercise > > that > > > > plan. When another chapter or people in another chapter disagree, > they > > > can > > > > say so. However, the argument for a large delegation has been made. > One > > > > really important fact is that some people do not benefit from going > to > > > > conferences. They do not make the connections, they do not get the > > point. > > > > When people know this applies to them, it is an excellent argument > for > > > them > > > > not to go. > > > > > > > > My experience is that going to conferences can be really effective. > > There > > > > are opportunities that are hard to get in any other setting. My > > > experience > > > > is that people tend to be more approachable, more humane when I have > > met > > > > them. It really helps me in what I do. > > > > > > > > Now Steve, why not address this. This is why money will be spend. It > is > > > > realistic, effective and particularly for a new team a great > > opportunity > > > to > > > > get to know people. My mum would applaud money spend effectively. > > > > Thanks, > > > > GerardM > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2 April 2014 12:10, Steve Zhang <cro0...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > I'll just start off by saying these are my own personal views and > > don't > > > > > necessarily represent the views of the rest of the WMAU committee > or > > > > > Wikimedia Australia as a whole. > > > > > > > > > > My view on spending funds might be seen as a bit extreme, but I > > believe > > > > > that funds received through the APG process or from money received > > > > through > > > > > current or past annual WMF fundraisers is still donor money > > > > > , and that it does not belong to the relevant chapters > > > > > , and > > > > > as a result > > > > > we need to respect that when spending our > > > > > their > > > > > money. > > > > > Remember, most donations are less than $30 and come from everyday > > > people. > > > > > When I was planning a meetup in 2012, a > > > > > good friend of mine > > > > > reminded me about "Grandma", and to keep in mind how Grandma would > > feel > > > > > about how I spent their $30. I've kept this in mind ever since. > > > > > > > > > > This is why I feel we should always be > > > > > frugal with the funds > > > > > that we have as a movement whenever possible, and question whether > > the > > > > > proposed expenditure is really necessary. Also, how we use the > funds > > we > > > > as > > > > > chapters already have can help or hinder future requests for funds, > > and > > > > > this is something I consider before signing off on a project or > > > > > expenditure. > > > > > > > > > > I'm not one to criticise others for the decisions they've made, for > > > this > > > > - > > > > > but I think the guideline 2+1 really should be adhered to by all, > and > > > > would > > > > > wonder what value there is in sending more than this along to the > > > > > conference on the dime of the donor. If it's acceptable for large > > > > chapters > > > > > with large reserves, it potentially puts smaller chapters at a > > > > disadvantage > > > > > or could be perceived as bias. > > > > > > > > > > With a week and a bit to go, it's not a time where this discussion > > will > > > > > mean the arrangements already made for attendees will be changed, > > but I > > > > > would hope that us as chapters would consider this more carefully > > going > > > > > forward. Might be a worthy discussion topic in Berlin. > > > > > > > > > > Steve Zhang > > > > > > > > > > President - Wikimedia Australia > > > > > On 02/04/2014 9:27 am, "Itzik Edri" <it...@infra.co.il> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry Nicole, but I'm unhappy with your answer. You are right, > > > > engagement > > > > > > on other topics is needed, but this is not means people don't > have > > > the > > > > > > right to ask questions and raise concerns. > > > > > > > > > > > > We didn't have this discussions last year, as none of the chapter > > > sent > > > > > more > > > > > > then 2+1. There were few people who came before to the Education > > > > Meeting, > > > > > > but the left and didn't attend the ChapConf. I think we deserve > to > > > know > > > > > why > > > > > > this has been changed, and why no one notify or discussed about > it > > > > > before. > > > > > > I was member of the location committee, and I'm definitely > remember > > > we > > > > > > asked all the proposals to calculates the event costs by this > > "rule" > > > of > > > > > > number of representatives from each org. More than that, when we > > > > decided > > > > > to > > > > > > select Berlin, we even mentioned the fact that last years WMDE's > > > staff > > > > > and > > > > > > board was widely around, "breaking" the equality we are looking > > for, > > > > and > > > > > > asking to minimize WMDE's attendees to only what needed to run > the > > > > > > conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > WMDE did a great step toward open discussions about the goals and > > the > > > > > > program of the conference, so I find it strange they didn't > > welcome, > > > or > > > > > > willing to response such a crucial question that changed the > status > > > quo > > > > > we > > > > > > been used to since the beginning so secretly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Nicole Ebber < > > > > nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am glad that 1,5 weeks before the conference, there is > finally > > > some > > > > > > > activity showing up on the lists and the meta pages. I must > admit > > > > that > > > > > > > I would have really loved to see more engagement on topics like > > > > > > > conference goals and themes, support for the programme team > > > regarding > > > > > > > programme decisions, schedule and outcomes rather than having > the > > > > same > > > > > > > discussions on rules and logistics like every year before. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is still time (2 days) to give input to the schedule or > > > > > > > volunteer as a speaker for some of the sessions. And most > > > > importantly, > > > > > > > to start discussing and taking position towards the conference > > > topics > > > > > > > on-wiki and internally in our home organisations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2014/Programme > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone interested is very welcome to provide thoughts and > > ideas. > > > We > > > > > > > have three days full of exciting sessions, highly political > > > > > > > discussions and fun ahead of us, let's make the best of it > > > together! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am looking forward to seeing so many of you next week in > > Berlin! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > Nicole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 1 April 2014 10:47, Gerard Meijssen < > > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hoi, > > > > > > > > Money entrusted to a chapter is for that chapter to spend as > > they > > > > see > > > > > > > fit. > > > > > > > > The notion that it is money from the "public" is not a > license > > > for > > > > > > > everyone > > > > > > > > to meddle. There are people and places where such scrutiny is > > > best > > > > > > > > expressed. When questions are asked, let them be questions > and > > > not > > > > > > > implicit > > > > > > > > condemnations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fae can do whatever he likes. However, he should understand > > that > > > > as a > > > > > > > > former chair it is best for the new team to move in its own > > > > direction > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > not in the old direction. There is plenty that can be done > that > > > is > > > > > not > > > > > > > > controversial. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When formalities are used as arguments, you loose sight what > > the > > > > > > > > formalities are there for. It is best to "ignore all rules" > > when > > > > that > > > > > > > gets > > > > > > > > the job done in an effective way. The notion that because > > > somewhere > > > > > > else > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > "the movement" things have gone "wrong" does not justify the > > > > current > > > > > > > > criticism. A legitimate question could be "you are sending a > > > large > > > > > > > > delegation, why is that". It is not legitimate to say "you > > waste > > > > > money > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > sending people to a conference, why is that". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > GerardM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Op 31 mrt. 2014 16:44 schreef "Russavia" < > > > > > russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com > > > > > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Gerard, et al > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Gerard Meijssen > > > > > > > >> <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > My point is very much that it is for the chapter to decide > > if > > > > they > > > > > > > >> > spend their money wisely. It is for members of a chapter > to > > > > > question > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > >> > at an appropriate time and at an appropriate place. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Might I make a point here. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> It is not "their money", but rather the money of donors -- > > i.e. > > > > the > > > > > > > general > > > > > > > >> public -- who are every year told that Wikipedia needs your > > help > > > > to > > > > > > > >> survive. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> The "movement", as you all like to refer to it, has a > tendency > > > to > > > > > > waste > > > > > > > >> money on frivolous things such as travel and accommodation, > as > > > > > > > demonstrated > > > > > > > >> last year by > > > > > > > >> > > http://twkozlowski.net/how-40k-dollars-turned-to-petty-cash/and > > > > > > > >> > > http://twkozlowski.net/saving-by-spending-according-to-affcom/ > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> The appropriate time to question such spending is BEFORE the > > > funds > > > > > is > > > > > > > >> committed and spent. The place is unimportant, but here is > as > > > good > > > > > as > > > > > > > any. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> As a member of "the movement", Fae has every right to ask > such > > > > > > > questions, > > > > > > > >> and I believe he also has the right to be able to ask such > > > > questions > > > > > > > >> without snide remarks such as "Really Fae, as you are no > > longer > > > > the > > > > > > > chair, > > > > > > > >> why rule "from the grave"?" being thrown at him . > > Unfortunately, > > > > > there > > > > > > > is a > > > > > > > >> tendency in "the movement" when legitimate questions are > > raised, > > > > > for a > > > > > > > >> committed movementarian to deflect from that questioning > with > > > > snide > > > > > > > >> attacks. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Now, Fae has asked some legit questions of UK chapter, and > it > > is > > > > > only > > > > > > > fair > > > > > > > >> that they answer them. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Cheers, > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Russavia > > > > > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > > > > > >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > > > >> Unsubscribe: > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > > > > > , > > > > > > > >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org > > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Nicole Ebber > > > > > > > Leiterin Internationales > > > > > > > Head of International Affairs > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 > > Berlin > > > > > > > Tel. +49 30 219158 26-0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://wikimedia.de > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien > Wissens > > > > e.V. > > > > > > > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts > > > Berlin-Charlottenburg > > > > > > > unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das > > > > > > > Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer > 27/681/51985 > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org > > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > -- > -- > Jens Best > Präsidium > Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. > web: http://www.wikimedia.de > mail: jens.best <http://goog_17221883>@wikimedia.de > > Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts > Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig > anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, > Steuernummer 27/681/51985. > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
