I agree that 125 introductions is *not* a productive or fun way to use a short amount of time. In this instance, the process halted all conversation and created a no-win situation for members of the audience - either try to concentrate on an impossible-to-remember roll-call, or ignore the speakers. Neither is good and leaving the room would be even more impolite. However, it is good to have a problem that results from success!
A solution depends on what the purpose of the meeting is. If the purpose changes from a lunch meeting, different approaches could be used but multiple meetings or more scheduled talks should probably become strands of the conference. The trick is to balance structure and lack of structure in line with the principles and purpose. Assuming the meeting continues to be a lunch meeting, I think the principles that need to be remembered for such an event involving such a number of people are: - there is not much time and that time has to allow for eating (IMHO that does *not* mean wandering around trying to hold food and talk at the same time); - anything repetitive is bound to be tedious; - since there is a major conference in session, anything formal, other than a welcome from Sue, would either not be a lunch meeting or should be added to the conference agenda itself; - flexibility and a degree of spontaneity are necessary. So, one suggestion for a Wikimania Wiki Women's lunch meeting (and I am sure there are other possibilities that will be considered between now and the next conference) is to print up multiple copies of some theme labels for people to grab and put on their table as they go into the lunch room. For example, there could be labels for tables for women who want to: - meet new people/conference participants; - talk about the conference sessions; - NOT talk about the conference sessions; - continue an unfinished earlier discussion; - plan some women's meetings to be held during pre-allocated times during the conference (eg the women's edit-a-thon suggested above). There are many more possible but you get the drift. If multiple rooms are available the same procedure could be applied in advance and rooms allocated for lots of smaller lunch groups. That sort of thing depends on the venue but breaking it up means missing the opportunity for a gathering of everyone together. Also, requiring a forced choice for women who have a range of interests and commitments is something to avoid. Whiteghost.ink On 26 July 2012 07:01, Orsolya Gyenes <gyenes.orso...@wiki.media.hu> wrote: > Yes, we really didn't expect over 120 women (double as much as last year) > and I think it was right to get to know each other and learn where we all > coming from and what we are interested in. Usually that doesn't happen on > this list. > > Maybe we could organize a female edithaton during the Hacking Days in HK, > if there's a need for it. > > *~Orsolya* > Deputy Program Chair > > > 2012/7/25 Carol Moore DC <carolmoor...@verizon.net> > >> From http://wikimania2012.**wikimedia.org/wiki/Feedback#** >> Other_meetups_and_meetings<http://wikimania2012.wikimedia.org/wiki/Feedback#Other_meetups_and_meetings> >> >> The Women's Luncheon on Saturday was something I was very much looking >> forward to, but it fell short of my expectations. I was enjoying bonding >> with the women at my table, asking the speakers about their presentations >> and hoping to form some more solid relationships with veteran and new >> Wikipedians alike. Being required to sit back quietly while 125+ women each >> stood up to introduce themselves felt like a waste of an opportunity to >> build a stronger female editing community. Knowing that the women are >> passionate about sharing was good, but wouldn't have been more to the >> purpose to encourage networking so all the women in attendance would be >> more inclined to stay active and recruit knowing there was a pool of >> support they could personally draw upon? [[User:Samarista|Samarista]] >> ([[User talk:Samarista|talk]]) 17 July 2012 (UTC) >> >> I personally liked the intros. Perhaps suggest a common topic or two >> people can discuss at tables? >> >> Or have a separate meetups - a couple at different times, perhaps with >> different themes. That might answer her concerns ? >> >> Note that in the feedback section two of us mentioned that annoucements >> of meetups needed to be better. >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/gendergap<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > >
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
