+1 from my side for Sudhanwa's views.
I am still not clear as a small wikipedian, I should contribute to Foundation,
Chapter, Community.
With Regards,
Mandar V. Kulkarni
http://mr.wikipedia.org
http://mr.wikisource.org
http://live.wikimedia.in
----- Forwarded Message -----
>From: Sudhanwa Jogalekar <sudhanwa....@gmail.com>
>To: Wikimedia India Community list <wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>Sent: Thursday, 8 March 2012, 2:05
>Subject: Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] India Program: Community Monthly Report: Feb
>2012
>
>Hi,
>
>Let me take the focus of discussions back to the report/s where it all started.
>
>
>On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Hisham <his...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mar 7, 2012, at 1:38 PM, Pradeep Mohandas wrote:
>>
>>
>> In retrospect, I also understand the need for seperating the Foundation
>> activities as well. I think it is best to either go for total seperation of
>> community, chapter and Office or have general statements.
>>
>>
>> The work that India Program is doing is integrally embedded in community
>> building. This means we work directly with interested community members
>> across the world and with the Chapter. I don't think a total separation is
>> either practical or advisable. We should obviously avoid taking the option
>> of "general statements" - and we need to find a suitable island in between.
>
>I was going through the report and also saw another page here:
>https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Program/Outreach_Programs/Outreach_Sessions/Feb
>that gives listing of outreach sessions by IP.
>
>Another page by chapter also shows outreach reports. It is on the main
>page of wiki.
>
>IP and Chapter are having more or less similar functions. They do
>similar outreach efforts and have same people in some functions.
>
>Somehow, the reports from IP as well has chapter has about 9 entries
>each for outreach program and only 2 are common !!
>
>One of them is the now famous NITT academy and the other one is GNUnify.
>I was surprised to see only the English academy entry in GNUnify that
>was conducted by Ashwin and helped by IEP volunteers. The Marathi
>academy conducted at the same lab immediately after the lunch break is
>not mentioned at all. Also surprising was the entry where Moksh was
>involved. Possibly, it was supported by some IP person.
>
>General observation is that the report from IP shows the listing where
>only the IP, IEP people were involved and the chapter report mentions
>otherwise.
>
>This clearly means that there is a disconnect. I dont see any of the
>IEP/IP people joining the Pune community activities (except a few). In
>fact, one of the outreach session (mentioned in the report) by the IEP
>was not even mentioned on any of the lists.
>
>Possibly, there is some polarisation somewhere and personally I feel
>that it could be in favour of IP; simply because volunteers become
>paid activists there.
>
>Lets take a very much possible theoretical case(like the NITT, where
>volunteers had bad experiences) where a volunteer goes for conducting
>an academy and is not treated well and has bad facilities of
>lodging/boarding/travel etc. And for the same academy, a person from
>IP is also going and flies to/from the place and lives in a nice
>hotel. In such case, where and how to compare the voluntary work v/s
>paid staff work? The volunteer has spent his time and resouces for
>hardly anything but the staff is being paid for the same activity as
>part of the job.
>
>Ashwin has hinted about evaluating voluntary efforts. Is there any
>method to do it?
>
>Community members are same for both- chapter as well as IP. However,
>chapter is answerable to the community even when all the community
>members are not necessarily chapter members. (just a technical point.
>not to be emphasised), Whereas IP may not have any binding on anything
>and still get all kind of funds from WMF. And also hire people from
>the community for doing the same work people were earlier doing
>voluntarily. Also remember that chapter and the community members do
>their work voluntarily and not get paid for it.
>
>Well, just to clarify, I am not saying that community members, IP
>staff and IEP volunteers are not doing work. They are really doing
>fantastic work and that must to be appreciated. However, all those
>efforts/work has to be taken in various perspectives mentioned in this
>thread.
>
>Best regards
>-Sudhanwa
>
>
>~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!
>web: www.sudhanwa.com blog: www.sudhanwa.in
>Twitter: sudhanwa Check on FB, Linkedin for more.
>
>_______________________________________________
>Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
>Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
