Theoretically you are right, you COULD restart the process for a next year.
That is quite a professional attitude. Ask yourself, is that the kind of
effort you can ask of volunteers.. Be reasonable. It is too much effort for
what benefit ?
On 6 October 2015 at 01:18, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote:
> Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> >I, for one, am immensely grateful that you and your team (and Manilla's
> >just as much) chose to start such a hard endeavor for the community's
> >benefit! I really wish that communications and timing had been better
> >so that neither of your teams ended up wasting any effort too early (no
> >doubt you'll be contacted for future years as both locations are
> >desirable and your willingness to host is now known).
> >I know that the steering committee contacted our team (tentatively, very
> >early in the year) in part because they were aware that we were already
> >fully set to host Wikimania in 2017 with the groundwork for our hosting
> >having started in 2010, and most of our preparations still usable (and,
> >I expect, an opportunity to hold the first Wikimania in a Francophone
> >location played a part). It's clear to me the steering committee
> >dropped a ball in not noticing that both of your teams had started
> >working on bids in time to communicate with you.
> >That said, this kind of wasted effort is - from what I understand - the
> >very reason why the process needed changing. Even if three teams bid
> >for 2017, two of them would necessarily have wasted the tremendous work
> >that goes into preparing a bid - including the credibility cost of long
> >talks with venue and sponsors that turn out to a miss and the morale hit
> >of loosing in a bidding process. I suppose I'm a bit "glad" that the
> >leak occured before our team was ready to make the official announcement
> >because - if nothing else - this will prevent that waste to have been
> >even worse.
> This reads a bit strangely to me. You seem to suggest that bids can be
> worked on for many years: in this case, saying that planning for Montreal
> started in 2010 for an eventual 2017 bid. However, you continue on to
> write that it's wasted effort if a bid fails in a particular year.
> Wouldn't failed bids be re-usable in subsequent years?
> My guess is that sponsors and venues are capable of understanding a
> bidding process, so long as it's appropriately communicated to them.
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: