Training led and run by volunteers has very little to do with the
objections to the plan, which is about allocation of Chapter resources,
focus, and staff time. I don't see why we're running these two objections
together.

- Andrew.

On Friday, 28 September 2012, Thomas Dalton wrote:

> I'll say again, the issue here is the plan in aggregate. Specific examples
> aren't really important - there is plenty of room for reasonable people to
> come to different conclusions on a specific budget item. What we should be
> able to agree on though, is that this plan, when considered as a whole, is
> problematic.
> On Sep 28, 2012 10:44 PM, "Andrew Gray" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 28 September 2012 18:40, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Training is something the chapter is already involved in and should
>> > therefore ensure is done well, since it reflects on the chapter. Having
>> > individuals contacting potential trainees directly appears
>> unprofessional
>> > and leads to an inefficient and inconsistent response.
>>
>> I don't think it's producing bad results, but perhaps I'm biased.
>>
>> I've been spending the past six months doing *exactly this*; contacting
>> organisations directly, usually through personal contacts, arranging
>> training, and (with the invaluable help of volunteers) delivering it. I
>> have kept the chapter informed, but the sessions are pretty much
>> independent of the ongoing WMUK training events, though they provide
>> support (laptops, printed sheets, etc). I do not believe the chapter are in
>> any way unhappy with this arrangement; they've had plenty of opportunity to
>> say if they are!
>>
>> It's certainly more efficient than asking the chapter to do it - you
>> yourself have argued on this very mailing list that they are overworked,
>> and trying to do too much. To demand it be centralised is to give them yet
>> more work to do, on top of the existing load. It also introduces extra
>> inefficiencies - they won't be going through the same direct connections,
>> which makes the offer of a workshop less likely to be accepted, and it's
>> much easier to arrange a session when the person delivering it is also the
>> person negotiating it.
>>
>> Yes, random people emailing random contacts offering training is bad. But
>> if we trust the person to deliver the training professionally, and we are
>> willing to send them out there to represent the community in doing so, I
>> can't imagine any reason we wouldn't trust them to reach out and organise
>> the sessions as well.
>>
>> --
>> - Andrew Gray
>>   [email protected]
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Andrew Gray
>>   [email protected]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia UK mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
>>
>>
>>

-- 
- Andrew Gray
  [email protected]
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Reply via email to