On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Bishakha Datta <bishakhada...@gmail.com>wrote:

> *How can we ensure that such reports represent the perspectives of many of
> those involved in such events, rather than a singular perspective? One way
> to do so is to involve all 'teams' in writing their parts of the report -
> eg Scholarships, Programs etc, getting internal consensus within each team,
> and then providing it to the core team.

I agree with you on involving 'teams' in writing what went right / wrong in
their respective tasks. There is no need for internal consensus and all
that process, there is a talk page[1] and it has edit button on it, people
can sign with 4 ~ after their comments. :) I have a huge list of comments
on how programs could have been better  or communications for that
matter (there was no formal communication team IIRC, or people who worked
on communicating to delegates, speakers, others). I am going to use the
talk and but I am not sure how soon I can do that, would anyway be missing
few things since its already 6 months.

I urge anyone else involved in other tasks to do the same for the sake
documenting at a granular level of what happened @ WCI in their perspective
and how *they* could done it better. (Putting unpleasant things is not
wrong, but remember to point self as well in a fair self retrospection).

*How can we retain the sense of fun that is so much part of - and integral
> to - a volunteer movement?

What happened in WCI was a severe burnout. I can't count more than few
people who worked, but there were truckload of armchair advisers. It can't
be fun if that's the case. Looking back, chapter's decision to have a
bidding process would have made everyone aware where there are gaps in
capabilities to an extent, but just because people had Jimmy's dates it had
to be organized in Mumbai looks like a joke to me and I don't fully agree
to "It is important to acknowledge at this point that the entire Indian
Wikipedia Community backed and rallied behind the Mumbai and Pune
communities" since the discussion happened on a closed list of few people
out there. But am only hoping next WCI will be not held for the sake of
hosting it, but after careful review of what happened in WCI 11 and making
honest efforts in fixing a lot of things / procedures (including finances
/regulations /all drama) and making sure the host city has *enough*
volunteers who are committed to hold an event of the scale.



PS : I completely liked the random order of acknowledgements in the report
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 

Reply via email to