On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 21 June 2010 19:54, phoebe ayers <[email protected]> wrote: > > There have been post-mortems every year (with varying degrees of > > formality and levels of participation); these have resulted in a > > handful of private reports to the Foundation & within the org team > > (and many more sets of informal notes). Basically, every year the > > organizers have sat down, sometimes with other people and sometimes > > not, and talked about the conference afterwards; ideally this gets > > written up. I personally have four sets of these notes tucked away in > > various notebooks, documents, etc.... > > > > What there has never been is a publicly available report, or summation > > of these meetings, that anyone ever got around to posting for the rest > > of the world to see -- I think that's the part where exhaustion comes > > into play :) > > The idea of a post-mortem is to learn for the future, so it isn't > really worth having one if you don't publish the results for future > teams can learn from them. It's actually also useful for all the people involved to have a final discussion about what has happened; and the results of these conversations have gotten translated in various ways: to the bid criteria, to the documentation that is being built on meta, to the structures that the WMF has set up for supporting Wikimania, etc. But I am not disagreeing with you -- at all! -- that a formal public post-mortem report after the conference would be very helpful. I'm just explaining what has actually happened in practice :) -- phoebe
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
