> > > 4) I don't see a 55-47 vote on a menu of 3 options as being a > particularly > > > strong indication of community consensus. Indeed, it's pretty clear > there > > > isn't a consensus, and it would be a shame if people proceeded on the > basis > > > that "There was a consultation and the answer was X - so we're doing > X". > > > That said, I would be really happy to hear voices from the WMF or the > > > Wikimania Committee saying "The important factors we see are X, Y and > Z. > > > From the consultation showed lots of other people were thinking X and Y > > > (though less Z) and P and Q were also important which we hadn't thought > > > about. As a result, we are intending to do: This. > > > > > > For now, I'll point to this response I made to a similar question on the > > discussion page,[2] but I can elaborate more on this if you'd like. > > Yes please, that would be helpful!
Certainly! The feedback our team reviewed from participants indicated a few important factors supporting the conclusions in the consultation. As you and others have stated, the differences in the frequency of instances of support or concern were not substantial, so this difference was only a minor factor. One prominent factor that arose supporting Option 3 was a general desire for balance in support for for Wikimania and regional/thematic conferences. Participants supporting this option frequently expressed that these conferences both have independent, but important value for the work or projects in which they or others are engaged. For instance, many pointed to the importance of regional collaboration-- travel arrangements and matters of communication (particularly non-English) are easier, local needs of projects can be prioritized in programming, and there are opportunities for people to form working groups. At the same time, participants recognized the value of meeting together as a unified movement. Participants also voiced one benefit we did not consider-- that taking this balanced approach could be an opportunity for better interaction between Wikimania and regional/thematic conferences: e.g. Wikimania could serve to initiate projects relevant for a subsequent regional conference. Conversely, a regional/thematic conference could serve as good preparation for engagement at Wikimania. A second factor were concerns over the costs of Wikimania itself, though the "what" varied between the cost of attending, travel, and cost to "movement resources" overall. Given the discussion on the discussion page and mailing lists, there are clearly a diversity of views over whether Wikimania should cost more or less, but it was clear from participant feedback that there were concerns with the overall cost. This was also true for folks who supported an annual Wikimania. (On a related note, I also would have expected that a summary of this budget to have been presented from the outset, and I apologize that our team did not have this ready until recently.) A third factor was about the accessibility and exclusivity of Wikimania. Many participants reported that they and others in their communities have routinely been unable to attend Wikimania. Consequently, they feel they've been denied important opportunities and conversations with fellow contributors, and to the extent that regional/thematic conferences can be made more accessible, the better. Organizers also noted that a consequence of an annual Wikimania is that there is less motivation to plan/organize regional conferences, which harms local solidarity and understanding of regional issues. I hope these themes provide a bit more depth to the feedback and context for the conclusions in the consultation. Thanks, Jethro Chris "Jethro" Schilling I JethroBT (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:I_JethroBT_(WMF)> Community Organizer, Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Chris (or Jethro)! Thanks for taking time to reply. > > > Is it the WMF's view that Wikimania in its current form is > > > > > broken and change is needed - if so who represents that view to the > > > community? (Or if not, what *is* the WMF's view?) > > > > > > It is fair to say that our team does view the past planning process for > > Wikimania (i.e. 2015 and prior) as problematic and not feasible, for the > > reasons described in the consultation itself.[1] > > Great. I thought that table of issues was helpful, though wasn't quite > clear whose it was (so to speak). If the answer is "it's generally the > view of the WMF staff working with this", that is good to know. > > > 4) I don't see a 55-47 vote on a menu of 3 options as being a > particularly > > > strong indication of community consensus. Indeed, it's pretty clear > there > > > isn't a consensus, and it would be a shame if people proceeded on the > basis > > > that "There was a consultation and the answer was X - so we're doing > X". > > > That said, I would be really happy to hear voices from the WMF or the > > > Wikimania Committee saying "The important factors we see are X, Y and > Z. > > > From the consultation showed lots of other people were thinking X and Y > > > (though less Z) and P and Q were also important which we hadn't thought > > > about. As a result, we are intending to do: This. > > > > > > For now, I'll point to this response I made to a similar question on the > > discussion page,[2] but I can elaborate more on this if you'd like. > > Yes please, that would be helpful! > > Chris > > > > > [1] < > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New_Wikimania#What_is_the_problem_you.27re_trying_to_solve.3F > > > > > > > [2] < > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New_Wikimania/Outcomes&diff=next&oldid=15313641 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: 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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
