On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Bence Damokos <bdamo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The name could be changed if the participants/organisers want to change it. > As I tried to point out, I don't see the name as the underlying problem > people really have, and changing it will not solve the problem of exclusion > people see. > > We can make a conference that has a participants list that involves people > that *should *or at least the people that really *want* to be there, we can > also rename the conference for the people that *are *currently there and > forget about those that want and should be there. I'd rather focus on the > former. > > Regardless, I do feel an emotional connection to the name and I expect many > people that have participated or organised it might feel this and I > appreciate that those who have not been there can see it as a minor thing > that can be changed without any cost. It might not be perfect, but it does > have history and I do contend that the people that first started using it > are Wikimedia, and they should not feel guilty about having come up with > the idea first. Indeed, at this time, resources have been invested into the > name and confusion is ebbing around the "Wikimedia Conference" name due to > the years of history behind it. > > But in closing, I will once again point to my statements that names are > symbolic and they can be changed. If the participants change the name that > sends a totally different vibe than if the change is imposed on the > participants, even if the end result is the same new name. > > Best regards, > Bence If the as-yet undetermined organizers choose to name it Wikimedia Conference, then I suppose no one will act to force them to stop. But we are Wikimedia as much as the organizers and participants are, as much as hundreds of thousands of volunteers are. In a "Wikimedia Conference" you might expect it to be open to those Wikimedians. With a narrower theme of governance, I doubt the prediction of it morphing into a second Wikimania would come true. And while I accept your assertion that the name has history and meaning to those who have participated there, I remain skeptical at the power the name holds for you and others. It is, as you'll agree, a fairly generic name. And less than a handful of events over as many years does not a venerable tradition make. So I would hope that the organizers, whoever they turn out to be, will make the simple gesture of adding a single word to the name of the event. It is still Wikimedia; it's just aimed at affiliates, those who organize and have attended the event up through now. Indeed, the conference of affiliates that you've attended in the past is valuable and worthy. I'd suggest you allow others interested to attend if resources permit, but I wouldn't ask you to fundamentally alter the nature of the event. Merely make it clear whom you represent, so that others don't feel you claim to represent them when you do not -- as Ilario seemed to with his "principle of delegation" comment. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
