[WMCEE-l] CEE meeting planning

Kiril Simeonovski kiril.simeonovski at gmail.com
Sun Aug 26 17:21:18 CEST 2012


Dear members of the mailing-list,

We're five days after the lunch of the draft program and schedule, but
unfortunately nobody has commented yet. Because we don't have much time to
waste until the conference, I will assume that there is nothing to change
with the draft versions and that we can adopt it as official program. I
made slight modifications by adding a time slot for topics related to the
technical issues across the CEE countries and about the Wikidata project.

Best regards

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Asaf Bartov <abartov at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 7:03 AM, Mile Kiš <m.mikym at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It seems the grant application depends mostly on the travel expenses. We
>>> cannot estimate those without knowing how many people will need help with
>>> their tickets. And we can't tell that without knowing how many people will
>>> actually step in front of the others and say something. Otherwise, we're
>>> going to have a wonderful program with a lot of topics on which no one will
>>> speak.
>>
>>
>> My recent experience with global event tell me that we never can be 100%
>> sure how we will need for travel. Because that we have cash reserves, and
>> we will send it back if we do not spent it. So war several chapters told
>> they have money for travel.  I hope WMF can cover travel costs. (Asaf, what
>> you think about this?)
>>
>
> Yes.  On the one hand, don't wait to finalize travel information, because
> that'll never be ready on time, and ticket prices go up.  On the other
> hand, the WMF would only fund this meeting if it is clear there is a good
> chance all this airfare would buy some meaningful mission-aligned goals,
> beyond Wikimedians hanging out together, which is admittedly always fun. :)
>
> So I would second Johannes -- the most important thing is to focus on _a
> few_ topics/goals that you feel CEE delegates need to (and are able to)
> work on, and make a good case for it.
>
> And while we _do_ want, in principle, maximal representation, we also want
> _meaningful_ representation (or rather, meaningful *participation*), i.e.
> we want to find a balance between costs and benefits.  This means every
> delegate should have a strong track record justifying the expense.  For
> example, if there's only one active volunteer from Ruritania[1], it doesn't
> make sense to have two delegates, just for the sake of symmetry.  Agreed?
>
> Cheers,
>
>     Asaf
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruritania
> --
>     Asaf Bartov
>     Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
> https://donate.wikimedia.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WMCEE-l mailing list
> WMCEE-l at tools.wikimedia.pl
> http://tools.wikimedia.pl/mailman/listinfo/wmcee-l
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://tools.wikimedia.pl/pipermail/wmcee-l/attachments/20120826/de217d4b/attachment.html>


More information about the WMCEE-l mailing list