Then if we are to approach this more realistically, the outcomes should be
measured on a longer scale. You do not develop a network from a single
networking event. And certainly I'd prioritise this for more established
community members. Certainly I'd see community integration as a significant
positive outcome for the chapter.

I'd be very keen to see a dedicated technical community manager as a paid
role, who would mostly spend their time going to London tech events and
representing the movement.

*Edward Saperia*
Chief Coordinator Wikimania London <http://www.wikimanialondon.org>
email <[email protected]> * facebook<http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia>
 * twitter <http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia> * 07796955572
133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG


On 18 March 2014 13:12, Fæ <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 18 March 2014 12:12, Edward Saperia <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Perhaps part of the reason that we struggle to recruit is that we don't
> > publicly take part in events in related topics. An event like this has a
> > communications budget far in excess of our own, we might as well take
> > advantage of it. We should have someone charismatic there to present on
> > behalf of the community.
>
> "Promotion" and "networking" is a rationale we have put forward many
> times before for paying for conference/event attendees. Often the
> money is put up based on commitments to write a blog post or an
> internal report. For a speculative, principality social networking
> event, the lost opportunity cost of volunteer and employee time and
> expenses should be justified with measurable reported outcomes, such
> as increased project participation, content creation or productive
> long term partnerships with other organizations.
>
> The charity is accountable and committed to transparency, so if money
> and time is spent in ways with no direct outcome that benefits
> Wikimedia projects or the open knowledge aims of the charity, we
> should expect questions to be raised. In my view, and that of several
> other members, an example of a poor decision was sending an
> inexperienced new volunteer for an all expenses paid weekend at a
> Berlin conference last year, there was a blog post afterwards with
> ideas, none has provided any measurable outcomes in the several months
> since; in fact the volunteer has been completely inactive in terms of
> creating educational content for Wikimedia projects.[1][2]
>
> If there were a couple of conference that we could see made a real
> difference to finding new active volunteers for Wikimedia projects or
> where highly productive long term partnerships with organizations were
> started, then I would prefer to see the charity provide scholarships
> for several active volunteers to take part or attend. The key here is
> measurement of outcomes, something that the new board have made a fuss
> about in the new strategy and should be a natural part of the way the
> charity works and makes decisions about where to spend its £700,000+;
> keeping its active volunteers at the centre of the decision making
> process.
>
> Links
> 1.
> https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Water_cooler/2013#Diversity_Conference_-_how_many_UK_volunteers_are_going.3F
> 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kwaku_BBM
>
> Fae
> --
> [email protected] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Reply via email to