On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Isarra Yos <zhoris...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 11/09/14 22:06, Pete Forsyth wrote:
>
>>
>> Personally, I have no problem with the existence of the conference, but I
>> find its name alienating. Not everyone agrees with that assessment, but
>> clearly some others in this thread do.
>>
>
> What Pete said.
>
> We could go into issues with the exclusionary nature itself, such as that
> it would exclude representatives of groups who ran into trouble becoming
> official - despite such a conference likely being one of the best venues
> for them to bring up and discuss with relevant others how to actually
> address or resolve that trouble that excluded them in the first place...
>
> ...but that sort of thing is much harder to resolve/address. The name, at
> least, is simple, and should also make a lot of the other problems less
> glaring in the process.
>
>
Assuming the issue of the name is the sticking point ...

What about the Wikimedia Meta-Conference? Or Meta-Wikimedia Conference?  Or
MetaWiki Conference?

It's more about the organisations in the background than keep the movement
going.  It doesn't seem (from my second-hand knowledge of the event) that a
regular editor would get a lot out of it?


Regards,

Charles (User:Chuq)
_______________________________________________
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>

Reply via email to