I agree. Some stats on the Meta pages per year would be helpful, as well as a list of grantees and their reports (for those who didn't make a report, maybe we have other data available on them, like submissions & presentations, or something like that)
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 2:51 PM, WereSpielChequers < [email protected]> wrote: > There may be a rumour circulating among some editors that the same people > get sponsorship every year, but there is also a rumour that there is no > point even applying if you had a grant three years ago. I considered it > worth applying for Mexico as I had been turned down for both Hong Kong and > Washington DC, but I know at least one editor who didn't apply this year > because he had had sponsorship two or three years ago. > > In these circumstances it would be helpful to have a little information, > no need to have names, but if we could have the number of people who have > had sponsorship once, twice, three times or more in the last six years I > suspect it would do much to reassure people that the myth that the same > people get sponsorship every year is either true or untrue. > > > > Regards > > Jonathan > > > On 31 Jul 2015, at 13:16, Lane Rasberry <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello, > > Leave the fairness of the scholarship process aside. Regardless of its > fairness, the process is generating ill-will because of lack of > transparency and poor communication. The problem might be growing to > something beyond what volunteers can manage and perhaps paid staff support > from the communications department of the WMF would be a worthwhile > investment to protect community reputation considering the seriousness of > this, the problem's persistence, and the fact that a little more > communication would go a long way to resolving the negativity. > > Thanks Praveen for voicing concerns. They are worth addressing and what > you are saying is what a significant and large demographic also has been > believing for years. I first heard this in 2012. It is good that this year > for the first time the list of scholarship recipients was published and > shared openly. Regardless of whether the scholarship award process is fair > and adequate, it is definitely true that the rumor is circulating among > many countries, especially in the Global South, that some people are > getting scholarships repeatedly. > > Here are some of the complaints which I have repeatedly heard, and which > are critical to address for the sake of community health: > > 1. People who get scholarships somehow become better candidates for > getting more scholarships, when ideally, new people from a region should > attend Wikimania every time > 2. In the Global South especially, people who get scholarships > actively or unconsciously suppress the development of their local Wikimedia > community so that they retain a leadership role and remain the most > eligible people to receive scholarships, grants, attention from Wikimedia > community leaders, and other privileges. > 3. There is a tremendous amount of ignorance and lack of cultural > insensitivity about the value of scholarships among WMF staff and Wikimedia > community members from richer countries. At this year's Wikimania, we > stayed in a city where ~75% of residents make USD 160 a month, ( > > http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/07/24/world/social-issues-world/mexico-poverty-rate-hit-46-2-last-year-2-million-join-ranks-poor/) > and stayed in a hotel where the nightly charge per room was $320 or two > month's income by local standards. The amount of money thrown around during > Wikimania is shocking to many Wikipedians and this issue is never > discussed, so far as I know. > 4. Just in general and beyond scholarships - there needs to be more > discussion about how money is viewed differently in different places. This > applies to grants, staffing, community engagement, and many other things. > If complaints are not pouring in about this, it is only because people are > not comfortable speaking up. Diversity creates a lot of concerns and we are > a very diverse community. > > yours, > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Nicholas Bashour < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I believe that what Praveen may be saying is that he thinks the value >> that a repeat scholarship recipient can gain from coming back to wikimania >> numerous times is outweighed by the value that someone who has never been >> to wikimania but has nevertheless been a very involved wikimedian can gain >> from attending. Therefore, given that there are limited resources, >> scholarships should always go to the people who can gain the most from >> receiving them, which Praveen may be arguing will always be someone who has >> never been to wikimania versus someone who has. He's saying that despite >> having many repeat scholarship recipients, there has not been any added >> value on wiki to justify that, and therefore new recipients should be >> actively prioritized over repeat ones. That's not to say whether or not >> that's actually the case or that this was the point he was trying to >> convey, but rather what I understood his argument to be. >> >> Best, >> >> Nicholas >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> Am 31.07.2015 um 07:39 schrieb Nkansah Rexford <[email protected] >> >: >> >> I just want to know why some users were able to achieve scholarship again >>> and again while regular Wikimedians being excluded. >>> >> >> And that is EXACTLY what Stuart explained. I understood, unless you >> didn't! >> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> On Friday 31 July 2015 04:01 PM, Stuart Prior wrote: >>> >>> Praveen, >>> >>> I was chair of the Scholarship Committee for this year. >>> >>> It's unfortunate that you didn't get a scholarship, however there were >>> many high quality applications and sometimes the difference between success >>> and failure is very small, and I feel genuinely bad for any Wikimedian with >>> a good application that didn't make it, but it's very competitive. >>> >>> We do take into account previous scholarship awards, and focus on making >>> sure new people get a chance. But consistently good applications and >>> excellent work can warrant repeat scholarship awards despite this. >>> >>> In some cases where people have been granted Scholarships previously but >>> have been unable to attend the conference due to visa issues we have >>> considered that when receiving their applications for the current year. >>> >>> I won't comment on any individual's scholarship, but "regular >>> Wikimedians" certainly make up the bulk of the scholars. Edit count is not >>> the only factor, but it still is a significant (and clearly verifiable) >>> factor when looking at someone's application. >>> >>> However, we looked for organisers too. Some of our community are better >>> facilitators and community builders than they are editors, and running >>> events, training and building partnerships are things that were marked >>> favourably. >>> >>> Moreover, two identical applicants can make wildly differing >>> applications. We look for those that comprehensively demonstrate their >>> contributions and qualify their statements. >>> >>> Please apply again next year. You have just as much opportunity as >>> anyone else. >>> >>> Hope this helps. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Stuart Prior >>> User:Battleofalma >>> >>> On 31 July 2015 at 09:16, Dariusz Jemielniak <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Praveen, >>>> >>>> I've been a steward, as well as the chair of the FDC for three years, >>>> so you may assume I've been somewhat active in Wikimedia movement. I did >>>> not receive a global scholarship neither (although I did eventually go, as >>>> I got elected to the Board of Trustees). >>>> >>>> I think it is clearly an assumption of bad faith to say that there is a >>>> bias in scholarship committee. The criteria are explicit, and obviously >>>> with limited resources a large number of excellent candidates, even with >>>> accepted presentations, will not make it. >>>> >>>> I would suggest you focus on Wikimedia activity, prepare a great >>>> presentation for the next year as well as a compelling application, and try >>>> again. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> DJ "pundit" >>>> 31 lip 2015 10:07 "praveenp" <[email protected]> napisał(a): >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Please don't derail the actual topic of the thread. I really didnt >>>>> assume such an interpretation from quoting his words. Whenever I asked >>>>> about the issue to anybody, I generally got such a reply, which I want to >>>>> avoid here. >>>>> >>>>> If it is need to start a new thread, I will do that. :-) >>>>> >>>>> But please tell me why some people regularly get scholarships atleast >>>>> since 2008, active (in Wikimedia projects / outreach programms) users >>>>> never >>>>> get a chance to share their experience and problems at Wikimania. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Praveen. P >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Friday 31 July 2015 12:40 PM, WereSpielChequers wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Praveen, >>>>> >>>>> Whether there was anything personal or confidential in Gerard's >>>>> private emails to you is for him to say not for you to decide. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> >>>>> Jonathan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 31 Jul 2015, at 05:59, praveenp <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Osmar Valdebenito, >>>>> No offense was intended :-(. For prominent communities that may be >>>>> true, but could you check list of users who got scholarship from Malayalam >>>>> community. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Amir Ladsgroup, >>>>> >>>>> 1) As you can see there is nothing confidential or personal in Gerards >>>>> reply. He just gave a summary of "known" practices. >>>>> 2) Users are not asking for trophies. They also want to participate >>>>> Wikimania and share and get the experience. >>>>> 3) Wikimedia projects are community processes. I simply don't >>>>> understand how granting scholarship to same persons again and again for >>>>> five or six years help that process. I also dont understand that >>>>> communication and sharing of multiple viewpoints, ideas and practices is >>>>> possible in the above scenario. >>>>> 4) Yes; If clicking tick marks in translatewiki on some 500 string in >>>>> 5 minutes before applying for scholarship (as reviewing the translation) >>>>> is >>>>> a prominent contribution. >>>>> >>>>> In the beginning every body treated equal, we have multiple >>>>> participants (with understandable reasons) for Wikimania. It started to >>>>> shrink later and now people plainly believe granting scholarship is an act >>>>> of favoritism. I also want to prove I am wrong. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Praveen. P >>>>> User:Praveenp >>>>> >>>>> PS: Mail striped because mailman held my previous reply claiming " >>>>> Message body is too big:" >>>>> >>>>> On Friday 31 July 2015 05:03 AM, Amir Ladsgroup wrote: >>>>> >>>>> There are several issues I want to comment: >>>>> 1-First of all. Do you have permission from Gerard to publish your >>>>> conversation? Maybe there is something confidential in it, Did you care to >>>>> check? >>>>> 2- Scholarship is not award or trophy, bear that in mind. >>>>> 3- People are expected to come here and learn, communicate, etc. >>>>> that's why a same person gets scholarship, >>>>> 4- No one's wife got scholarship because of being wife of someone. >>>>> They probably are prominent contributors too. >>>>> 5- Check my first question and answer that. (Emphasizing) >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 12:05 AM Osmar Valdebenito < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, but when I read "No regular Wikimedian get any scholarship", I >>>>>> stopped reading. >>>>>> It is not only a lie, but also very unfair to all the extremely great >>>>>> Wikimedians that attended and made great contributions in Wikimania, and >>>>>> also the volunteers that have helped now and in the past reviewing and >>>>>> evaluated thousand of applications in the Scholarship Committee. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wikimania-l mailing >>>>> [email protected]https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimania-l mailing >>> [email protected]https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> +Rexford <http://google.com/+Nkansahrexford> | khophi.co >> <http://khophi.co/about> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimania-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimania-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >> >> > > > -- > Lane Rasberry > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia > 206.801.0814 > [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimania-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimania-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
