Could somebody concisely explain what this certainly means for WMUK, and what
it might mean in the worst- and best-case scenarios? I understand the issues,
and I'm sure the nuances are still being worked out, but I can't be the only
person wondering.
Harry
Fr
On 31 March 2012 21:26, HJ Mitchell wrote:
> Could somebody concisely explain what this certainly means for WMUK, and
> what it might mean in the worst- and best-case scenarios? I understand the
> issues, and I'm sure the nuances are still being worked out, but I can't be
> the only person wonderi
Status quo for a few years. What happened at Coventry today what really counts.
Hope it went well. Status quo for a few years. What happened at Coventry today
what really counts. Hope it went well.
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Dalton
Sender: wikime
Howdy y'all,
Would anyone be interested in helping out with our bid to hold Wikimania in
London in 2013?
We've got a couple of weeks to refine the bid page, and there's lots of
little areas that need attention... a fuller description of the venue, more
accommodation options, more information on t
On 31 March 2012 21:53, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> Now, what happens in the 2016-17 fundraiser is anybody's guess. The
> WMF board is intending to re-evaluate the whole thing. My hope is that
> the 4 fundraising chapters will have demonstrated what a success
> chapters fundraising can be and other ch
On 31 March 2012 22:10, Edward Saperia wrote:
> Howdy y'all,
>
> Would anyone be interested in helping out with our bid to hold Wikimania in
> London in 2013?
>
> We've got a couple of weeks to refine the bid page, and there's lots of
> little areas that need attention... a fuller description of t
On 31 March 2012 22:17, David Gerard wrote:
> On 31 March 2012 21:53, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>
>> Now, what happens in the 2016-17 fundraiser is anybody's guess. The
>> WMF board is intending to re-evaluate the whole thing. My hope is that
>> the 4 fundraising chapters will have demonstrated what a
Without commenting on any other point or expressing any other opinions wrt
either bid, I don't think the board has let us down at all (and I'm hardly
known for speaking up in defence of the board!). Having to choose between two
bids from cities with strong Wikimedia communities, one of which was
On 31 March 2012 22:42, HJ Mitchell wrote:
> Without commenting on any other point or expressing any other opinions wrt
> either bid, I don't think the board has let us down at all (and I'm hardly
> known for speaking up in defence of the board!). Having to choose between
> two bids from cities wi
On 31 March 2012 22:57, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> On 31 March 2012 22:42, HJ Mitchell wrote:
> > Without commenting on any other point or expressing any other opinions
> wrt
> > either bid, I don't think the board has let us down at all (and I'm
> hardly
> > known for speaking up in defence of the
On 1 April 2012 00:38, James Farrar wrote:
> You make the assumption that the people who had worked on the rejected bid
> would have shaken that rejection off to give their wholehearted support to
> the chosen bid.
If the deadline for bids has passed then the practical issue is moot,
but so far a
On 1 April 2012 00:42, Anthony (AGK) wrote:
> On 1 April 2012 00:38, James Farrar wrote:
>> You make the assumption that the people who had worked on the rejected bid
>> would have shaken that rejection off to give their wholehearted support to
>> the chosen bid.
> If the deadline for bids has
On 1 April 2012 00:42, Anthony (AGK) wrote:
> On 1 April 2012 00:38, James Farrar wrote:
>> You make the assumption that the people who had worked on the rejected bid
>> would have shaken that rejection off to give their wholehearted support to
>> the chosen bid.
>
> If the deadline for bids has
On 1 April 2012 01:11, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> Paid employees of WMUK haven't been involved in either bid, that's
> part of what I'm complaining about. (Richard has been working on the
> London one in his spare time, but not as a WMUK employee).
Should WMUK not be involved in developing a Wikimani
Not... quite. I've been advising on both, as a volunteer, but I can't
bring myself to openly support either (as a volunteer or a staff
member). It's simply too tricky. Steve Virgin (Bristol) is a fantastic
person and a board member with a great bid, and Ed Saperia (London) is a
fantastic person
It's the Chapters role to support a successful bid - but the bids
themselves should, we feel, be community-driven, not chapter-driven. The
chapter has a policy that says we cannot do anything that a volunteer
will do - we're here to support a volunteer-run bid with funding, advice
and staff.
I've not been part of either team, though as someone who has been to three
Wikimanias I've given some help to both. But then I've read most bids from
the last couple of years and made suggestions or copyedits to practically
all of them.
I'm not convinced that it is good for a chapter to host Wikim
17 matches
Mail list logo
