Hoi, Theoretically you are right, you COULD restart the process for a next year. That is quite a professional attitude. Ask yourself, is that the kind of effort you can ask of volunteers.. Be reasonable. It is too much effort for what benefit ? Thanks, GerardM
On 6 October 2015 at 01:18, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote: > Marc A. Pelletier wrote: > >I, for one, am immensely grateful that you and your team (and Manilla's > >just as much) chose to start such a hard endeavor for the community's > >benefit! I really wish that communications and timing had been better > >so that neither of your teams ended up wasting any effort too early (no > >doubt you'll be contacted for future years as both locations are > >desirable and your willingness to host is now known). > > > >I know that the steering committee contacted our team (tentatively, very > >early in the year) in part because they were aware that we were already > >fully set to host Wikimania in 2017 with the groundwork for our hosting > >having started in 2010, and most of our preparations still usable (and, > >I expect, an opportunity to hold the first Wikimania in a Francophone > >location played a part). It's clear to me the steering committee > >dropped a ball in not noticing that both of your teams had started > >working on bids in time to communicate with you. > > > >That said, this kind of wasted effort is - from what I understand - the > >very reason why the process needed changing. Even if three teams bid > >for 2017, two of them would necessarily have wasted the tremendous work > >that goes into preparing a bid - including the credibility cost of long > >talks with venue and sponsors that turn out to a miss and the morale hit > >of loosing in a bidding process. I suppose I'm a bit "glad" that the > >leak occured before our team was ready to make the official announcement > >because - if nothing else - this will prevent that waste to have been > >even worse. > > This reads a bit strangely to me. You seem to suggest that bids can be > worked on for many years: in this case, saying that planning for Montreal > started in 2010 for an eventual 2017 bid. However, you continue on to > write that it's wasted effort if a bid fails in a particular year. > Wouldn't failed bids be re-usable in subsequent years? > > My guess is that sponsors and venues are capable of understanding a > bidding process, so long as it's appropriately communicated to them. > > MZMcBride > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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> > _______________________________________________ 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>