I would like to add here that Nitika's & Subashish's presentation was a
great one for me to customise with my slides. I strongly recommend that
rather than recreate the wheel their presentation be used by all those
planning English language outreach. One of the things IP has done right.
Now I request that IP should complete the suite of presentation materials
required for outreach.

Warm regards,

Ashwin Baindur
------------------------------------------------------


On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Ashwin Baindur <ashwin.bain...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Sudhanwa, a small correction. I was not supported by IEP members in
> Gnunify but those of Wikipedia Pune Club which does include some former IEP
> participants but also lots of new faces and myself :).
>
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Ashwin Baindur
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Sudhanwa Jogalekar <sudhanwa....@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Let me take the focus of discussions back to the report/s where it all
>> started.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Hisham <his...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mar 7, 2012, at 1:38 PM, Pradeep Mohandas wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > In retrospect, I also understand the need for seperating the Foundation
>> > activities as well. I think it is best to either go for total
>> seperation of
>> > community, chapter and Office or have general statements.
>> >
>> >
>> > The work that India Program is doing is integrally embedded in community
>> > building.  This means we work directly with interested community members
>> > across the world and with the Chapter.   I don't think a total
>> separation is
>> > either practical or advisable.  We should obviously avoid taking the
>> option
>> > of "general statements" - and we need to find a suitable island in
>> between.
>>
>> I was going through the report and also saw another page here:
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Program/Outreach_Programs/Outreach_Sessions/Feb
>> that gives listing of outreach sessions by IP.
>>
>> Another page by chapter also shows outreach reports. It is on the main
>> page of wiki.
>>
>> IP and Chapter are having more or less similar functions. They do
>> similar outreach efforts and have same people in some functions.
>>
>> Somehow, the reports from IP as well has chapter has about 9 entries
>> each for outreach program and only 2 are common !!
>>
>> One of them is the now famous NITT academy and the other one is GNUnify.
>> I was surprised to see only the English academy entry in GNUnify that
>> was conducted by Ashwin and helped by IEP volunteers. The Marathi
>> academy conducted at the same lab immediately after the lunch break is
>> not mentioned at all. Also surprising was the entry where Moksh was
>> involved. Possibly, it was supported by some IP person.
>>
>> General observation is that the report from IP shows the listing where
>> only the IP, IEP people were involved and the chapter report mentions
>> otherwise.
>>
>> This clearly means that there is a disconnect. I dont see any of the
>> IEP/IP people joining the Pune community activities (except a few). In
>> fact, one of the outreach session (mentioned in the report) by the IEP
>> was not even mentioned on any of the lists.
>>
>> Possibly, there is some polarisation somewhere and personally I feel
>> that it could be in favour of IP; simply because volunteers become
>> paid activists there.
>>
>> Lets take a very much possible theoretical case(like the NITT, where
>> volunteers had bad experiences) where a volunteer goes for conducting
>> an academy and is not treated well and has bad facilities of
>> lodging/boarding/travel etc. And for the same academy, a person from
>> IP is also going and flies to/from the place and lives in a nice
>> hotel. In such case, where and how to compare the voluntary work v/s
>> paid staff work? The volunteer has spent his time and resouces for
>> hardly anything but the staff is being paid for the same activity as
>> part of the job.
>>
>> Ashwin has hinted about evaluating voluntary efforts. Is there any
>> method to do it?
>>
>> Community members are same for both- chapter as well as IP. However,
>> chapter is answerable to the community even when all the community
>> members are not necessarily chapter members. (just a technical point.
>> not to be emphasised), Whereas IP may not have any binding on anything
>> and still get all kind of funds from WMF.  And also hire people from
>> the community for doing the same work people were earlier doing
>> voluntarily. Also remember that chapter and the community members do
>> their work voluntarily and not get paid for it.
>>
>> Well, just to clarify, I am not saying that community members, IP
>> staff and IEP volunteers are not doing work. They are really doing
>> fantastic work and that must to be appreciated. However, all those
>> efforts/work has to be taken in various perspectives mentioned in this
>> thread.
>>
>> Best regards
>> -Sudhanwa
>>
>>
>> ~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!
>> web: www.sudhanwa.com  blog: www.sudhanwa.in
>> Twitter: sudhanwa Check on FB, Linkedin for more.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
>> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Reply via email to