Like Bence, I would be interested to see how this kind of experiment in WMF grantmaking works out. And also like him I would be a little surprised if something like this is implemented with no notice period.
A couple of responses to Lodewijk's post; > with people > confirming my fear that this will likely undermine the community support > (or at least support by the 'organizing community') for gendergap-related > projects in general - be it out of frustration, compensation or jealousy. Out of interest, were any of these people doing anything at all to support the reduction of the gender gap in the first place? ;) > I > called it a 'negative campaign' in my emails because the focus is not about > actively boosting one type of requests (which is the claim), but rather > about making it harder to do something unrelated to it in the hope that > people instead will choose for the easy way, and organize a gendergap > related event. > Equally, if you have limited resources, prioritising one thing means reducing attention to something else. So saying "we shouldn't work on the gender gap if anything else gets less atention as a result" is logically equivalent to saying "We shouldn't work on the gender gap". Regards, Chris _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
