Gnangarra, you're attaching a great deal of significance to a small detail
in a complex situation. But please do look at the broader picture:

   - The chair of the Wikimania Committee has acknowledged that the
   Montreal selection is not confirmed.[1]
   - The supervisor of the committee's WMF representative has asserted the
   selection is not confirmed, and made assertions that match the original
   published timeline. (start of this thread)
   - The committee's/jury's *recommendations* (and they really have never
   been anything more) have been followed in the past; but there has never *yet
   *been a viable alternative recommendation.

When I was a member of the Wikimania Jury, it was pretty well acknowledged
within the jury that the setup was far from ideal, and should ideally have
a stronger mandate and a more transparent processes. The problem has long
been broadly acknowledged; it's not terribly controversial, but it will
take effort to make an improvement.

It seems that with the establishment of the Wikimania Committee, an effort
has been made to fix the basic problems; from what I've read here, that
effort has not (yet?) been successful, meaning that more work is needed.

The only way the Wikimania Committee's recommendation will be unopposed is
it is accepted by those in a position to offer an alternative. There is
LOTS OF TIME to offer an alternative, if you or anybody else wants to start
offering suggestions for how to do so.

If you think the best way forward is for everybody involved to accept the
Montreal recommendation *months before WMF will do so*, OK. That seems like
a strange conclusion, but I don't really have any stake in where Wikimania
is held, so you'll get no argument from me. But I do think anybody who
disagrees with you and the Wikimania Committee should not hesitate to work
toward a viable alternative. There's still plenty of time.

[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/13980522

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> wrote:

> interesting suggestions Pete but the published timeline is based on the
> published process which has now been marked as obsolete/historical. We also
> know none of that process had been followed nor was there any intention to
> follow that process. Are you seriously suggesting people continue to put
> time and effort into the bids and ask people outside of the movement to
> also make effort, without any leadership from WMF that there is even any
> value in it.
>
> Lets look at the possible outcomes how they will perceived if Montreal 2017
> is not followed through with;
>
>    - Montreal still wins - it was already decided the process was token
>    gesture to effort of the others but it was never going to be anything
> but
>    - Perth , Manila, or Bali - who ever wins will be seen as the most vocal
>    opponent to process and being awarded 2017 was an appeasement not a
> genuine
>    best contender
>    - another city not yet in the pool -  went there to stop all the
>    arguments, a spiteful decision by those involve in the original decision
>    because of the backlash from the bidders who followed the published
>    processes
>
>
> It really doesnt matter how a solution is proposed the way events have
> occurred it has poisoned every selection outcome option, the best way
> forward is for WMF to just accept Montreal and then put effort into
> restoring community faith in the Wikimania processes and repairing the
> damage done to those communities who acted in good faith following the
> process laid down and refined by the community over the last 10 years.
>
>
>
> On 6 October 2015 at 22:47, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > All:
> >
> > Based on a number of the posts in this thread, I think a few points are
> > worth underscoring.
> >
> >    1. The Wikimania Jury (historical -- and for what it's worth, I was a
> >    member) and Wikimania Committee (present) have never had a strong
> > mandate.
> >    Its recommendations have generally been accepted by the Wikimedia
> > community
> >    and the Wikimedia Foundation.
> >    2. While it's possible the Wikimania Committee made what it
> *originally
> >    intended* to be a final and binding decision, there is nothing
> > preventing
> >    the committee from revisiting its decision.
> >    3. As evident in Siko's post, the WMF does not yet regard the Montreal
> >    decision as final, and does not expect to reach such a decision before
> > the
> >    end of 2015.
> >
> > Siko's message aligns with the long-published timeline for venue
> > selection.[1]
> >
> > For comparison, past decisions have been made as late as March or April.
> > There is still A LOT of time to make a final decision.
> >
> > I'd suggest that anybody deeply dissatisfied with either the process or
> > proposed decision of the Wikimania Committee simply devote their efforts
> to
> > supporting an alternative bid (Perth, Manila, or elsewhere; the original
> > timeline still allows plenty of time for even *submitting* a bid). The
> > Wikimedia Foundation has a good deal of influence over legitimizing the
> > choice of a private group.
> >
> > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2017_bids
> >
> > In short, there is no emergency here; rather, there's lots of opportunity
> > to come up with alternative venue options and alternative process
> > proposals.
> >
> > -Pete
> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Carlos M. Colina <
> ma...@wikimedia.org.ve>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Siko
> > >
> > > El 06/10/2015 a las 01:11 a.m., Siko Bouterse escribió:
> > >
> > >> Hi folks,
> > >>
> > >> Just letting you know that I’m reading the recent Wikimania-focused
> > >> mailing
> > >> list threads with interest, as the Community Resources team is now
> > >> on-point
> > >> for funding and coordinating WMF’s involvement in Wikimania.
> > >>
> > >> A couple of first thoughts to share:
> > >>
> > >> 1. WMF has learned from past Wikimanias that we need to do our
> > >> due-diligence on venue etc before the host team and location is
> > announced.
> > >> One reason for this is that we have a limited budget for Wikimania,
> and
> > >> doing a site visit before the host is finalized helps us ensure that
> > we’re
> > >> able to support the costs of the event in a given location. Ellie
> Young
> > is
> > >> headed to Montreal in 2 weeks and based on what she learns from that
> > >> visit,
> > >> we’re aiming to give the steering committee what they need to confirm
> > >> selection before the end of 2015.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Seriously? But the committee seems to have already taken a decision as
> > > early as August, with the e-announcement mail scheduled to be sent
> > sometime
> > > in October
> > >
> > >    ///
> > >
> > >    /Wikimania Committee meeting/
> > >
> > >    2015-08-21, 16:00 UTC / 09:00 PDT
> > >    DECISION: Committee happy to endorse Montréal as a great choice for
> > >    2017. /
> > >
> > > /
> > > /
> > >
> > >    /Venue//////: wikimedia-l, wikimania-l/
> > >
> > >    /Audience////: Prospective Wikimania attendees, and other interested
> > >    Wikimedians/
> > >
> > >    /What//////: Announce 2017 venue/
> > >
> > >    /When//////: ~ October 2015/
> > >
> > >    /From//////: James F. as Chair, o/b/o the Wikimania Committee/
> > >
> > >
> > >    /Subject////: //Wikimania 2017 to be held in Montréal in Canada/
> > >
> > >
> > >    /All,/
> > >
> > >
> > >    /I am delighted to announce on behalf of the Wikimania Committee
> > >    that Wikimania, the annual Wikimedia community conference, will be
> > >    held for 2017 in Montréal in Canada; congratulations. /
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > That said, we recognize that
> > >> communications around this haven’t gone as planned,
> > >>
> > >
> > > Sort of.
> > >
> > >>   and we are looking into
> > >> improvements…(see thought 2)
> > >>
> > >> 2. We, too, would like to see the movement building towards a shared
> > >> vision
> > >> of Wikimania! It is great to see so many people, in true
> > Wikimedian-style,
> > >> thinking about big-picture questions of participation, representation,
> > and
> > >> content at Wikimania. Knowing that mailing list discussions have their
> > >> limits, here’s how my team is thinking about collecting feedback more
> > >> systematically for this going forward:
> > >>
> > >> We’ll be launching a community consultation in November to help build
> > >> towards more shared vision and process improvements for Wikimania
> 2018 -
> > >> 2021. Two key inputs we’ve been thinking about using to launch that
> > >> conversation are 1) responses from the survey of last Wikimania’s
> > >> attendees
> > >> and 2) the steering committee’s recommendation for host selection
> going
> > >> forward.
> > >>
> > >> We’re still regrouping from the latest Resources Consultation, and
> will
> > >> begin planning for a Wikimania Consultation next week, so after that
> > we’ll
> > >> be able to share more information about what this consultation will
> look
> > >> like and the exact timeline. Meanwhile, suggestions and open questions
> > >> that
> > >> you’d like to see resolved via this consultation are most welcome in
> > this
> > >> thread. My hope is that a consultation will help broaden participation
> > in
> > >> these conversations and get us from input to action.
> > >>
> > > The problem here is that even if the reasoning for deciding behind
> closed
> > > doors the host for Wikimania 2017 was 100% valid, the way it was done,
> > > planning everything as early as August and planning when to release
> > > information to the people to make it seem transparent (as the WMF
> expects
> > > from all wikimedians), the way how it was handled lacked ethics and the
> > way
> > > the WMF seems to react ("yeah well, we think we screwed it, let's move
> > > forward") happens again and again, and the movement receives always the
> > > same poor excuses.
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Warm regards,
> > >> Siko
> > >>
> > >>
> > > --
> > > "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee
> wayuukanairua
> > > junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya
> junain."
> > > Carlos M. Colina
> > > Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 |
> > www.wikimedia.org.ve
> > > <http://wikimedia.org.ve>
> > > Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee
> > > Phone: +972-52-4869915
> > > Twitter: @maor_x
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> GN.
> Vice President Wikimedia Australia
> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
>
_______________________________________________
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