https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AFuture_of_the_Wikimedia_Conference&diff=5611433&oldid=5611349
imo. Vince 2014-04-02 20:32 GMT+02:00 Cornelius Kibelka <[email protected]>: > Yes, finally the discussion we need! Pity that it happens only one week > before the conference itself. > > My point of view: > We have different types of conference: GLAMCamp, EduWiki, Wikimania, > whatever. > > Beside Wikimania, which is quite a "fruit salad" of topics and themes and > seen as *the* gathering of the global Wikimedia community, all of thoses > confereces have quite a special, limited scope. I see the Wikimedia > Conference as the highly political, meta level conference. This is the only > meeting in the year where we can discuss governance, strategy, movement > politics issues only, excluding all the programmatic work. As it is the > only meeting of this type during the year, at least a part of the programme > team tried to keep all the sessions in this meta scope. We felt a need for > those topics, which can't be discussed at those other meetings. > > Obviously, it doesn't seem to be so clear for many people. Maybe the > majority even thinks that we don't even need that type of conference. Who > knows.., all discussion adressing this issue fizzled out in the last three > past. > > However, please think about this! It's important. At the conference we'll > have a special session about this, the session is called actually "Future > of the Wikimedia Conference". We need input from everyone to see how we > should continue and what should happen next year. > > Best > Cornelius > > ---- > Cornelius Kibelka > > Twitter: @jaancornelius > Mobile:+351-91-9860232 (Vodafone PT) > German number currently offline > > > > > On 2 April 2014 19:16, Chris Keating <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am genuinely puzzled as to why, if nobody on the WMUK board (such as > > > the CEO or the current Chairman) is sure what the purpose of the > > > conference is, they should chose to invest the donor's money in > > > sending 5 trustees and 3 full time employees to it (presumably the > > > employees are being paid for their time rather than going as > > > volunteers). > > > > > > > > Just to be clear, I know what the benefits we will get out of it are, > and I > > can tell you the direction that I would like the conference to take in > > future; I'm just wondering whether others have the same perception. > > > > This is not a new question, as Nathan has pointed out, and he is probably > > right to say it is best to continue it here; > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Future_of_the_Wikimedia_Conference > > > > Chris > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
