[Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
69 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Leinonen Teemu
Hei,

5 cents: would it make a difference if the Wiki Loves Monuments / Art project plans (and others) will explicitly promise that, for instance, the gender (f/m) balance of the participants (n 500) will be 40/60 and +50% of them will be new editors?

This would be meet the strategic objectives.

-Teemu

On Sat Jan 03 2015 05:27:47 GMT-0500 (COT), Romaine Wiki wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Some disturbing news entered my mailbox the past days. The grant making
> team is going to shut down the grantmaking process for Project and Event
> Grants (PEG) and Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) for three full months!
>
> They have decided that they want to focus only on a specific strategic
> priority: the gender gap, and that all other good projects are refused for
> 3 months (February-April).
>
> Having more attention to a strategic priority is fine to me. Having more
> attention to the problem of the gender gap, sounds good to me as such, we
> can use much more projects and content in those areas. But that does not
> mean that many many volunteers who are organizing other projects should
> become the victim of other projects.
>
> This is a negative signal to all those volunteers who are currently working
> on project plans to be submitted in February, March and April. Good
> projects to be ignored, just because the WMF think those are less
> important. They say this is a positive campaign, but this sounds as a
> negative campaign to me. This discourages many volunteers in doing projects.
>
> And even worse: this is only to be generally announced 2 weeks before that
> period of shutting down starts! (this sounds like a joke, sadly it isn't)
>
> To organize a good project volunteers (yes, we are still unpaid! and
> organize these projects in our spare time!) we need the time to communicate
> well with all our partners and sponsors, and need the time to come up with
> a good project plan with a stable basis. Rushing a project in just a couple
> of weeks time is very unpleasant and does not help in getting a good
> quality project. And announcing it two weeks before the period indicates
> that organizers aren't taken seriously (enough).
>
> For example, we are currently planning to organize Wiki Loves Monuments in
> 2015 again, the world wide contest to have a better documentation and
> better display of all the cultural monuments worldwide, recognised as
> largest photo contest in the world by Guinness World Records. We are
> currently working on forming a team and want to have a good stable plan to
> be submitted within some weeks, but now we need to rush. And yes we need to
> start in January/February or it will be too late to organize it properly.
>
> Also all the national teams of Wiki Loves Monuments, the international team
> recommend all the national teams to start in January/February, to have a
> proper organisation together with various local partners and sponsors, but
> now all these teams are delayed for three months.
>
> And a personal project of mine in Belgium, I am planning to organize Wiki
> Loves Art in Belgium, together with various partners and sponsors. We
> intent to start in February, but now have to rush to get such done.
>
> By the way: did you know there is a Belgium Gap? Belgian subjects are
> relatively less and worse described on the various Wikipedias.
>
>
> This shutting down results in:
> * Discouraging many volunteers who are planning to submit good project
> proposals.
> * Having volunteers rushed with project plans, which lowers the quality of
> the plans.
> * Having volunteers being late and delayed with projects, for no good
> reason.
>
> Grantmaking is intented to support the communities, not frustrating them.
> WMF: stop this negative campaign!
>
>
> And for all project teams who want to organize a gender gap project: great
> you organize this, it is very very welcome! But I like to make a
> suggestion: submit the proposal on the first day after the shutting down
> period to give a strong signal to WMF that shutting down is a bad idea.
>
>
> It is time for a new strategic priority: closing the Community Gap. That is
> the gap between WMF and the local communities worldwide. It is not new, it
> exists for many years already. (It resulted also in the drama of the
> situation around the Mediaviewer in 2014, the drama with the Visual Editor
> in 2013, etc. in what WMF didn't sense well the community.) (Maybe the gap
> is less between WMF and the English speaking part of the world, but the
> world is larger. We have many people around the world who are speak a
> different language. WMF is not sensing the worldwide community well
> enough.)
> Finally we should do more about this Community Gap.
>
> For those celebrating: I wish you a happy new year with great projects that
> make every single human being freely share in the sum of all human
> knowledge!!
>
> Romaine
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

--
Sent from my Jolla
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Jane Darnell
In reply to this post by Romaine Wiki-2
Nope. Whether or not lots and lots of female-related content is generated
and by whom, the participation factor is crucial. Without the women, there
is no female perspective, period. And as far as gender measurement goes,
even if you count all the ones who declined to specify their gender, the
Dutch Wikipedia still comes up as less than 10% female.

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Romaine Wiki <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It is perfectly defined, it only matters which point of view you take.
>
> The Wikimedia movement consists out of people, projects and content. There
> is less content about so-called female topics. There seem to be less
> projects that specifically cover those so-called female topics. And there
> are less female contributors. All three of these views are related with
> each other.
>
> And as I sometimes write about those so-called female topics, I notice it
> is more difficult to write neutral about those topics and therefore harder
> to write about.
>
> Further, I must say that I personally do not feel any need to disclose my
> gender, even while a lot of you have met me. Maybe it is different on some
> wikis, but generally I have the impression that many users do not want to
> disclose it either. So the percentage is less well defined, but I do think
> the m/f spread is far from balanced.
> But something what seems not to be defined is what those so-called female
> topics exactly are. And second, how large these subjects combined are in
> the outside world, because wanting them to be 50-50 is not fair if the
> subjects are 20-80 spread. Or maybe there are gender neutral topics also.
>
> So yes, there are certainly things that are not defined, but what the
> gendergap is, seems to be defined.
>
> Romaine
>
>
> 2015-01-03 16:48 GMT+01:00 Jane Darnell <[hidden email]>:
>
> > I find it interesting to discover via this conversation that it has not
> > been defined yet!
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Bence Damokos <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Jane Darnell <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Nope. Gendergap is about the gap in female participation, not in
> > > > female-related topics.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I would say it is both, but in either case this would be important to
> > > define if that is the criteria on which to solicit proposals. (The
> vision
> > > of Wikimedia is to share the sum of all human knowledge, so from that
> > > standpoint the end is to close the gap in coverage, diversity in the
> > > editorship is a  very important means to it.)
> > >
> > > In any case, experimentation with the grants programme is probably for
> > the
> > > benefit of the community, but so is reliability and predictability. If
> > the
> > > original assumptions are clear, announcing a major policy change for
> the
> > > grants programme only with 3 weeks of planned lead time seems to go
> > againts
> > > those latter expectations unfortunately.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Bence
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Jane Darnell
In reply to this post by Leinonen Teemu
Teemu,
Of course! Not only that, but I think that an internal survey already shows
that WLM attracts a higher percentage of female contributors than any other
project that measured it. Don't assume by the subject heading of this
thread that any WLM project is being shut down. In fact, nothing is being
shut down.
Jane

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Leinonen Teemu <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hei,
>
> 5 cents: would it make a difference if the Wiki Loves Monuments / Art
> project plans (and others) will explicitly promise that, for instance, the
> gender (f/m) balance of the participants (n 500) will be 40/60 and +50% of
> them will be new editors?
>
> This would be meet the strategic objectives.
>
> -Teemu
>
> On Sat Jan 03 2015 05:27:47 GMT-0500 (COT), Romaine Wiki wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Some disturbing news entered my mailbox the past days. The grant making
> > team is going to shut down the grantmaking process for Project and Event
> > Grants (PEG) and Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) for three full
> months!
> >
> > They have decided that they want to focus only on a specific strategic
> > priority: the gender gap, and that all other good projects are refused
> for
> > 3 months (February-April).
> >
> > Having more attention to a strategic priority is fine to me. Having more
> > attention to the problem of the gender gap, sounds good to me as such, we
> > can use much more projects and content in those areas. But that does not
> > mean that many many volunteers who are organizing other projects should
> > become the victim of other projects.
> >
> > This is a negative signal to all those volunteers who are currently
> working
> > on project plans to be submitted in February, March and April. Good
> > projects to be ignored, just because the WMF think those are less
> > important. They say this is a positive campaign, but this sounds as a
> > negative campaign to me. This discourages many volunteers in doing
> projects.
> >
> > And even worse: this is only to be generally announced 2 weeks before
> that
> > period of shutting down starts! (this sounds like a joke, sadly it isn't)
> >
> > To organize a good project volunteers (yes, we are still unpaid! and
> > organize these projects in our spare time!) we need the time to
> communicate
> > well with all our partners and sponsors, and need the time to come up
> with
> > a good project plan with a stable basis. Rushing a project in just a
> couple
> > of weeks time is very unpleasant and does not help in getting a good
> > quality project. And announcing it two weeks before the period indicates
> > that organizers aren't taken seriously (enough).
> >
> > For example, we are currently planning to organize Wiki Loves Monuments
> in
> > 2015 again, the world wide contest to have a better documentation and
> > better display of all the cultural monuments worldwide, recognised as
> > largest photo contest in the world by Guinness World Records. We are
> > currently working on forming a team and want to have a good stable plan
> to
> > be submitted within some weeks, but now we need to rush. And yes we need
> to
> > start in January/February or it will be too late to organize it properly.
> >
> > Also all the national teams of Wiki Loves Monuments, the international
> team
> > recommend all the national teams to start in January/February, to have a
> > proper organisation together with various local partners and sponsors,
> but
> > now all these teams are delayed for three months.
> >
> > And a personal project of mine in Belgium, I am planning to organize Wiki
> > Loves Art in Belgium, together with various partners and sponsors. We
> > intent to start in February, but now have to rush to get such done.
> >
> > By the way: did you know there is a Belgium Gap? Belgian subjects are
> > relatively less and worse described on the various Wikipedias.
> >
> >
> > This shutting down results in:
> > * Discouraging many volunteers who are planning to submit good project
> > proposals.
> > * Having volunteers rushed with project plans, which lowers the quality
> of
> > the plans.
> > * Having volunteers being late and delayed with projects, for no good
> > reason.
> >
> > Grantmaking is intented to support the communities, not frustrating them.
> > WMF: stop this negative campaign!
> >
> >
> > And for all project teams who want to organize a gender gap project:
> great
> > you organize this, it is very very welcome! But I like to make a
> > suggestion: submit the proposal on the first day after the shutting down
> > period to give a strong signal to WMF that shutting down is a bad idea.
> >
> >
> > It is time for a new strategic priority: closing the Community Gap. That
> is
> > the gap between WMF and the local communities worldwide. It is not new,
> it
> > exists for many years already. (It resulted also in the drama of the
> > situation around the Mediaviewer in 2014, the drama with the Visual
> Editor
> > in 2013, etc. in what WMF didn't sense well the community.) (Maybe the
> gap
> > is less between WMF and the English speaking part of the world, but the
> > world is larger. We have many people around the world who are speak a
> > different language. WMF is not sensing the worldwide community well
> > enough.)
> > Finally we should do more about this Community Gap.
> >
> > For those celebrating: I wish you a happy new year with great projects
> that
> > make every single human being freely share in the sum of all human
> > knowledge!!
> >
> > Romaine
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> --
> Sent from my Jolla
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Chris Keating-2
In reply to this post by Lodewijk
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
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Lodewijk
Answering to Teemu and Chris:

I do think that the for Wiki Loves Monuments and Wiki Loves Art it is safe
to claim that if we organize it the way we would always do, it would still
tip the gender balance in our community a little more to the female side.
However, I disagree that this should be a main consideration, because I
think that would be true for so many outreach projects. Focusing on that
would be a pity and a distraction imho. Also, for most participants we
don't know the gender, and we don't want to know the gender (because asking
for it alone can scare people away) - except for a sample of them, who
happen to answer the survey afterwards. All data on that is quite shaky.

If necessary, I could easily make a case why WLM is a wonderful gendergap
project - the point is that I don't want volunteers to waste their time on
making such cases, but rather let them be innovative, come up with new
ideas instead of rebranding existing ideas on something like the gendergap.
My problems are more fundamental than 'I can't get money for my specific
project'.

So Chris: yes, these people do a lot for reducing the gender gap in our
projects. Also, Wikimedia organizers tend to hop between projects - their
next might be more focused on a topic that is popular with women, if their
current idea isn't yet. Drawing them into a topic in a positive way (what
we do is cool! Join us!) tends to be more successful than telling them they
are not allowed to do other stuff (we won't fund you at all unless you do
this specific theme).

Prioritisation sounds great, but that only works that way if you have one
clearly defined pool of resources, that you can actually control. What do
you think is the major bottle neck in organizing activities in the
Wikimedia movement? In my experience, that is not money, or even WMF staff
capacity (even though it is a limiting factor sometimes), but the primary
bottle neck is volunteer organizers (or editors). And volunteer time is not
a resource you can easily 'control'. If you want to influence it, the most
effective way is by persuading the volunteers why another angle is more
interesting, more fun, more effective.

Best,
Lodewijk



On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Chris Keating <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> 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
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Lila Tretikov
For everyone here: I've asked our Grantmaking team to comment and clarify
the details of this plan.

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Answering to Teemu and Chris:
>
> I do think that the for Wiki Loves Monuments and Wiki Loves Art it is safe
> to claim that if we organize it the way we would always do, it would still
> tip the gender balance in our community a little more to the female side.
> However, I disagree that this should be a main consideration, because I
> think that would be true for so many outreach projects. Focusing on that
> would be a pity and a distraction imho. Also, for most participants we
> don't know the gender, and we don't want to know the gender (because asking
> for it alone can scare people away) - except for a sample of them, who
> happen to answer the survey afterwards. All data on that is quite shaky.
>
> If necessary, I could easily make a case why WLM is a wonderful gendergap
> project - the point is that I don't want volunteers to waste their time on
> making such cases, but rather let them be innovative, come up with new
> ideas instead of rebranding existing ideas on something like the gendergap.
> My problems are more fundamental than 'I can't get money for my specific
> project'.
>
> So Chris: yes, these people do a lot for reducing the gender gap in our
> projects. Also, Wikimedia organizers tend to hop between projects - their
> next might be more focused on a topic that is popular with women, if their
> current idea isn't yet. Drawing them into a topic in a positive way (what
> we do is cool! Join us!) tends to be more successful than telling them they
> are not allowed to do other stuff (we won't fund you at all unless you do
> this specific theme).
>
> Prioritisation sounds great, but that only works that way if you have one
> clearly defined pool of resources, that you can actually control. What do
> you think is the major bottle neck in organizing activities in the
> Wikimedia movement? In my experience, that is not money, or even WMF staff
> capacity (even though it is a limiting factor sometimes), but the primary
> bottle neck is volunteer organizers (or editors). And volunteer time is not
> a resource you can easily 'control'. If you want to influence it, the most
> effective way is by persuading the volunteers why another angle is more
> interesting, more fun, more effective.
>
> Best,
> Lodewijk
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Chris Keating <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > 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
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Romaine Wiki-2
In reply to this post by Jane Darnell
Hi Jane,

Read!
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikilovesmonuments/2014-December/007600.html

> From February 1-April 30, PEG will only accept
> proposals as part of the gender gap campaign, with the exception for urgent
> requests.

This means regular projects will not be accepted. That is effectively
shutting the grantmaking down.
Of course we will not let WLM to be shut down. But this grantmaking
shutting down is very demotivating and discouraging, for many organisers.

This is also counter productive in solving the gender gap problem.

Romaine





2015-01-03 18:10 GMT+01:00 Jane Darnell <[hidden email]>:

> Teemu,
> Of course! Not only that, but I think that an internal survey already shows
> that WLM attracts a higher percentage of female contributors than any other
> project that measured it. Don't assume by the subject heading of this
> thread that any WLM project is being shut down. In fact, nothing is being
> shut down.
> Jane
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Leinonen Teemu <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hei,
> >
> > 5 cents: would it make a difference if the Wiki Loves Monuments / Art
> > project plans (and others) will explicitly promise that, for instance,
> the
> > gender (f/m) balance of the participants (n 500) will be 40/60 and +50%
> of
> > them will be new editors?
> >
> > This would be meet the strategic objectives.
> >
> > -Teemu
> >
> > On Sat Jan 03 2015 05:27:47 GMT-0500 (COT), Romaine Wiki wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Some disturbing news entered my mailbox the past days. The grant making
> > > team is going to shut down the grantmaking process for Project and
> Event
> > > Grants (PEG) and Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) for three full
> > months!
> > >
> > > They have decided that they want to focus only on a specific strategic
> > > priority: the gender gap, and that all other good projects are refused
> > for
> > > 3 months (February-April).
> > >
> > > Having more attention to a strategic priority is fine to me. Having
> more
> > > attention to the problem of the gender gap, sounds good to me as such,
> we
> > > can use much more projects and content in those areas. But that does
> not
> > > mean that many many volunteers who are organizing other projects should
> > > become the victim of other projects.
> > >
> > > This is a negative signal to all those volunteers who are currently
> > working
> > > on project plans to be submitted in February, March and April. Good
> > > projects to be ignored, just because the WMF think those are less
> > > important. They say this is a positive campaign, but this sounds as a
> > > negative campaign to me. This discourages many volunteers in doing
> > projects.
> > >
> > > And even worse: this is only to be generally announced 2 weeks before
> > that
> > > period of shutting down starts! (this sounds like a joke, sadly it
> isn't)
> > >
> > > To organize a good project volunteers (yes, we are still unpaid! and
> > > organize these projects in our spare time!) we need the time to
> > communicate
> > > well with all our partners and sponsors, and need the time to come up
> > with
> > > a good project plan with a stable basis. Rushing a project in just a
> > couple
> > > of weeks time is very unpleasant and does not help in getting a good
> > > quality project. And announcing it two weeks before the period
> indicates
> > > that organizers aren't taken seriously (enough).
> > >
> > > For example, we are currently planning to organize Wiki Loves Monuments
> > in
> > > 2015 again, the world wide contest to have a better documentation and
> > > better display of all the cultural monuments worldwide, recognised as
> > > largest photo contest in the world by Guinness World Records. We are
> > > currently working on forming a team and want to have a good stable plan
> > to
> > > be submitted within some weeks, but now we need to rush. And yes we
> need
> > to
> > > start in January/February or it will be too late to organize it
> properly.
> > >
> > > Also all the national teams of Wiki Loves Monuments, the international
> > team
> > > recommend all the national teams to start in January/February, to have
> a
> > > proper organisation together with various local partners and sponsors,
> > but
> > > now all these teams are delayed for three months.
> > >
> > > And a personal project of mine in Belgium, I am planning to organize
> Wiki
> > > Loves Art in Belgium, together with various partners and sponsors. We
> > > intent to start in February, but now have to rush to get such done.
> > >
> > > By the way: did you know there is a Belgium Gap? Belgian subjects are
> > > relatively less and worse described on the various Wikipedias.
> > >
> > >
> > > This shutting down results in:
> > > * Discouraging many volunteers who are planning to submit good project
> > > proposals.
> > > * Having volunteers rushed with project plans, which lowers the quality
> > of
> > > the plans.
> > > * Having volunteers being late and delayed with projects, for no good
> > > reason.
> > >
> > > Grantmaking is intented to support the communities, not frustrating
> them.
> > > WMF: stop this negative campaign!
> > >
> > >
> > > And for all project teams who want to organize a gender gap project:
> > great
> > > you organize this, it is very very welcome! But I like to make a
> > > suggestion: submit the proposal on the first day after the shutting
> down
> > > period to give a strong signal to WMF that shutting down is a bad idea.
> > >
> > >
> > > It is time for a new strategic priority: closing the Community Gap.
> That
> > is
> > > the gap between WMF and the local communities worldwide. It is not new,
> > it
> > > exists for many years already. (It resulted also in the drama of the
> > > situation around the Mediaviewer in 2014, the drama with the Visual
> > Editor
> > > in 2013, etc. in what WMF didn't sense well the community.) (Maybe the
> > gap
> > > is less between WMF and the English speaking part of the world, but the
> > > world is larger. We have many people around the world who are speak a
> > > different language. WMF is not sensing the worldwide community well
> > > enough.)
> > > Finally we should do more about this Community Gap.
> > >
> > > For those celebrating: I wish you a happy new year with great projects
> > that
> > > make every single human being freely share in the sum of all human
> > > knowledge!!
> > >
> > > Romaine
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my Jolla
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Jane Darnell
I did!

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Romaine Wiki <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Jane,
>
> Read!
>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikilovesmonuments/2014-December/007600.html
>
> > From February 1-April 30, PEG will only accept
> > proposals as part of the gender gap campaign, with the exception for
> urgent
> > requests.
>
> This means regular projects will not be accepted. That is effectively
> shutting the grantmaking down.
> Of course we will not let WLM to be shut down. But this grantmaking
> shutting down is very demotivating and discouraging, for many organisers.
>
> This is also counter productive in solving the gender gap problem.
>
> Romaine
>
>
>
>
>
> 2015-01-03 18:10 GMT+01:00 Jane Darnell <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Teemu,
> > Of course! Not only that, but I think that an internal survey already
> shows
> > that WLM attracts a higher percentage of female contributors than any
> other
> > project that measured it. Don't assume by the subject heading of this
> > thread that any WLM project is being shut down. In fact, nothing is being
> > shut down.
> > Jane
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Leinonen Teemu <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hei,
> > >
> > > 5 cents: would it make a difference if the Wiki Loves Monuments / Art
> > > project plans (and others) will explicitly promise that, for instance,
> > the
> > > gender (f/m) balance of the participants (n 500) will be 40/60 and +50%
> > of
> > > them will be new editors?
> > >
> > > This would be meet the strategic objectives.
> > >
> > > -Teemu
> > >
> > > On Sat Jan 03 2015 05:27:47 GMT-0500 (COT), Romaine Wiki wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Some disturbing news entered my mailbox the past days. The grant
> making
> > > > team is going to shut down the grantmaking process for Project and
> > Event
> > > > Grants (PEG) and Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) for three full
> > > months!
> > > >
> > > > They have decided that they want to focus only on a specific
> strategic
> > > > priority: the gender gap, and that all other good projects are
> refused
> > > for
> > > > 3 months (February-April).
> > > >
> > > > Having more attention to a strategic priority is fine to me. Having
> > more
> > > > attention to the problem of the gender gap, sounds good to me as
> such,
> > we
> > > > can use much more projects and content in those areas. But that does
> > not
> > > > mean that many many volunteers who are organizing other projects
> should
> > > > become the victim of other projects.
> > > >
> > > > This is a negative signal to all those volunteers who are currently
> > > working
> > > > on project plans to be submitted in February, March and April. Good
> > > > projects to be ignored, just because the WMF think those are less
> > > > important. They say this is a positive campaign, but this sounds as a
> > > > negative campaign to me. This discourages many volunteers in doing
> > > projects.
> > > >
> > > > And even worse: this is only to be generally announced 2 weeks before
> > > that
> > > > period of shutting down starts! (this sounds like a joke, sadly it
> > isn't)
> > > >
> > > > To organize a good project volunteers (yes, we are still unpaid! and
> > > > organize these projects in our spare time!) we need the time to
> > > communicate
> > > > well with all our partners and sponsors, and need the time to come up
> > > with
> > > > a good project plan with a stable basis. Rushing a project in just a
> > > couple
> > > > of weeks time is very unpleasant and does not help in getting a good
> > > > quality project. And announcing it two weeks before the period
> > indicates
> > > > that organizers aren't taken seriously (enough).
> > > >
> > > > For example, we are currently planning to organize Wiki Loves
> Monuments
> > > in
> > > > 2015 again, the world wide contest to have a better documentation and
> > > > better display of all the cultural monuments worldwide, recognised as
> > > > largest photo contest in the world by Guinness World Records. We are
> > > > currently working on forming a team and want to have a good stable
> plan
> > > to
> > > > be submitted within some weeks, but now we need to rush. And yes we
> > need
> > > to
> > > > start in January/February or it will be too late to organize it
> > properly.
> > > >
> > > > Also all the national teams of Wiki Loves Monuments, the
> international
> > > team
> > > > recommend all the national teams to start in January/February, to
> have
> > a
> > > > proper organisation together with various local partners and
> sponsors,
> > > but
> > > > now all these teams are delayed for three months.
> > > >
> > > > And a personal project of mine in Belgium, I am planning to organize
> > Wiki
> > > > Loves Art in Belgium, together with various partners and sponsors. We
> > > > intent to start in February, but now have to rush to get such done.
> > > >
> > > > By the way: did you know there is a Belgium Gap? Belgian subjects are
> > > > relatively less and worse described on the various Wikipedias.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This shutting down results in:
> > > > * Discouraging many volunteers who are planning to submit good
> project
> > > > proposals.
> > > > * Having volunteers rushed with project plans, which lowers the
> quality
> > > of
> > > > the plans.
> > > > * Having volunteers being late and delayed with projects, for no good
> > > > reason.
> > > >
> > > > Grantmaking is intented to support the communities, not frustrating
> > them.
> > > > WMF: stop this negative campaign!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > And for all project teams who want to organize a gender gap project:
> > > great
> > > > you organize this, it is very very welcome! But I like to make a
> > > > suggestion: submit the proposal on the first day after the shutting
> > down
> > > > period to give a strong signal to WMF that shutting down is a bad
> idea.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It is time for a new strategic priority: closing the Community Gap.
> > That
> > > is
> > > > the gap between WMF and the local communities worldwide. It is not
> new,
> > > it
> > > > exists for many years already. (It resulted also in the drama of the
> > > > situation around the Mediaviewer in 2014, the drama with the Visual
> > > Editor
> > > > in 2013, etc. in what WMF didn't sense well the community.) (Maybe
> the
> > > gap
> > > > is less between WMF and the English speaking part of the world, but
> the
> > > > world is larger. We have many people around the world who are speak a
> > > > different language. WMF is not sensing the worldwide community well
> > > > enough.)
> > > > Finally we should do more about this Community Gap.
> > > >
> > > > For those celebrating: I wish you a happy new year with great
> projects
> > > that
> > > > make every single human being freely share in the sum of all human
> > > > knowledge!!
> > > >
> > > > Romaine
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from my Jolla
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Jane Darnell
In reply to this post by Lila Tretikov
Thanks Lila!

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 7:35 PM, Lila Tretikov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> For everyone here: I've asked our Grantmaking team to comment and clarify
> the details of this plan.
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Answering to Teemu and Chris:
> >
> > I do think that the for Wiki Loves Monuments and Wiki Loves Art it is
> safe
> > to claim that if we organize it the way we would always do, it would
> still
> > tip the gender balance in our community a little more to the female side.
> > However, I disagree that this should be a main consideration, because I
> > think that would be true for so many outreach projects. Focusing on that
> > would be a pity and a distraction imho. Also, for most participants we
> > don't know the gender, and we don't want to know the gender (because
> asking
> > for it alone can scare people away) - except for a sample of them, who
> > happen to answer the survey afterwards. All data on that is quite shaky.
> >
> > If necessary, I could easily make a case why WLM is a wonderful gendergap
> > project - the point is that I don't want volunteers to waste their time
> on
> > making such cases, but rather let them be innovative, come up with new
> > ideas instead of rebranding existing ideas on something like the
> gendergap.
> > My problems are more fundamental than 'I can't get money for my specific
> > project'.
> >
> > So Chris: yes, these people do a lot for reducing the gender gap in our
> > projects. Also, Wikimedia organizers tend to hop between projects - their
> > next might be more focused on a topic that is popular with women, if
> their
> > current idea isn't yet. Drawing them into a topic in a positive way (what
> > we do is cool! Join us!) tends to be more successful than telling them
> they
> > are not allowed to do other stuff (we won't fund you at all unless you do
> > this specific theme).
> >
> > Prioritisation sounds great, but that only works that way if you have one
> > clearly defined pool of resources, that you can actually control. What do
> > you think is the major bottle neck in organizing activities in the
> > Wikimedia movement? In my experience, that is not money, or even WMF
> staff
> > capacity (even though it is a limiting factor sometimes), but the primary
> > bottle neck is volunteer organizers (or editors). And volunteer time is
> not
> > a resource you can easily 'control'. If you want to influence it, the
> most
> > effective way is by persuading the volunteers why another angle is more
> > interesting, more fun, more effective.
> >
> > Best,
> > Lodewijk
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Chris Keating <
> [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Ilario Valdelli
In reply to this post by Romaine Wiki-2
Hi Romaine,
probably it's my feeling but a lot of countries apply for a grant for
WLM very late (in general during summer).

So it cannot be demotivating for WLM.

I do not understand the impact of the project to assign the first three
months of 2015 to a specific topic with the normal period of application
for the national teams.

The same international team of 2013 submitted the request in June.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Wiki_Loves_Monuments_international_team/2013_coordination 


Regards

On 03.01.2015 20:01, Romaine Wiki wrote:

> Hi Jane,
>
> Read!
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikilovesmonuments/2014-December/007600.html
>
>>  From February 1-April 30, PEG will only accept
>> proposals as part of the gender gap campaign, with the exception for urgent
>> requests.
> This means regular projects will not be accepted. That is effectively
> shutting the grantmaking down.
> Of course we will not let WLM to be shut down. But this grantmaking
> shutting down is very demotivating and discouraging, for many organisers.
>
> This is also counter productive in solving the gender gap problem.
>
> Romaine
>

--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Lodewijk
I hate to fall in repetition of the discussion we had already on the wiki
loves monuments mailing list about this but:
- the problems we identified are far more general than Wiki Loves
Monuments. Even if WLM is fully unaffected, our points stand because that
would be because of timing and not because it works so well.
- One of the learning lessons in 2013 for the international team (I was
part of that team), was that the grant request was finalized way too late.
The request dragged on too long for many reasons, and was already started
behind schedule. If it were up to me, the 2015 team would already make the
request this month anyway.
- Most teams indeed seem to either have it in an Annual Plan Grant, or are
very late in requesting. Also this is something we learn from each time
that it is, in fact, too late. I would definitely not encourage teams to
delay requesting if they already know what they have to request (this is
different if they are still chasing sponsors etc). Most of the other work
for organizing is already due in June-Aug, so it would be smart to be
finished with the finances by then. It allows to focus on what matters most
during that time.

Just to summarize from the other threat.

Best,
Lodewijk

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Romaine,
> probably it's my feeling but a lot of countries apply for a grant for WLM
> very late (in general during summer).
>
> So it cannot be demotivating for WLM.
>
> I do not understand the impact of the project to assign the first three
> months of 2015 to a specific topic with the normal period of application
> for the national teams.
>
> The same international team of 2013 submitted the request in June.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Wiki_Loves_
> Monuments_international_team/2013_coordination
>
> Regards
>
> On 03.01.2015 20:01, Romaine Wiki wrote:
>
>> Hi Jane,
>>
>> Read!
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikilovesmonuments/
>> 2014-December/007600.html
>>
>>   From February 1-April 30, PEG will only accept
>>> proposals as part of the gender gap campaign, with the exception for
>>> urgent
>>> requests.
>>>
>> This means regular projects will not be accepted. That is effectively
>> shutting the grantmaking down.
>> Of course we will not let WLM to be shut down. But this grantmaking
>> shutting down is very demotivating and discouraging, for many organisers.
>>
>> This is also counter productive in solving the gender gap problem.
>>
>> Romaine
>>
>>
> --
> Ilario Valdelli
> Wikimedia CH
> Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
> Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
> Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
> Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
> Tel: +41764821371
> http://www.wikimedia.ch
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Ilario Valdelli
Yes, considering that WLM mailing list has less subscribers than this
one, I suppose that it's better to repeat here this question.

The discussion is now out of that thread because it has opened a new one
here.

This may be helpful for people who do not understand the "root cause" of
this discussion.

Regards

On 03.01.2015 21:19, Lodewijk wrote:

> I hate to fall in repetition of the discussion we had already on the wiki
> loves monuments mailing list about this but:
> - the problems we identified are far more general than Wiki Loves
> Monuments. Even if WLM is fully unaffected, our points stand because that
> would be because of timing and not because it works so well.
> - One of the learning lessons in 2013 for the international team (I was
> part of that team), was that the grant request was finalized way too late.
> The request dragged on too long for many reasons, and was already started
> behind schedule. If it were up to me, the 2015 team would already make the
> request this month anyway.
> - Most teams indeed seem to either have it in an Annual Plan Grant, or are
> very late in requesting. Also this is something we learn from each time
> that it is, in fact, too late. I would definitely not encourage teams to
> delay requesting if they already know what they have to request (this is
> different if they are still chasing sponsors etc). Most of the other work
> for organizing is already due in June-Aug, so it would be smart to be
> finished with the finances by then. It allows to focus on what matters most
> during that time.
>
> Just to summarize from the other threat.
>
> Best,
> Lodewijk
>
>

--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Romaine Wiki-2
In reply to this post by Ilario Valdelli
Hi Ilario,

As said before, that certain grant requests are submitted late, it doesn't
mean it is a good idea.

I was also not speaking about WLM organizers alone, but about all
organizers in general.
Shutting down the grantmaking for them is highly demotivating. Also when it
does not effect them directly.

It is effectively shutting down all projects that should start or are to be
started in these three months. The Grants page says
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Start : "Supporting mission-allied
people and organizations around the world."
This is not supporting, but demotivating, demolishing, discouraging, and
frustrating the organizing volunteers.

Shutting down the grantmaking gives a strong negative signal to every
organiser. "Your project is not important enough for the movement", that is
what this campaign says.

This is campaign is not benefiting the community, it is damaging it and it
is damaging the trust of the community in WMF.

It is enlarging the Community Gap.

Romaine












2015-01-03 20:53 GMT+01:00 Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]>:

> Hi Romaine,
> probably it's my feeling but a lot of countries apply for a grant for WLM
> very late (in general during summer).
>
> So it cannot be demotivating for WLM.
>
> I do not understand the impact of the project to assign the first three
> months of 2015 to a specific topic with the normal period of application
> for the national teams.
>
> The same international team of 2013 submitted the request in June.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Wiki_Loves_
> Monuments_international_team/2013_coordination
>
> Regards
>
> On 03.01.2015 20:01, Romaine Wiki wrote:
>
>> Hi Jane,
>>
>> Read!
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikilovesmonuments/
>> 2014-December/007600.html
>>
>>   From February 1-April 30, PEG will only accept
>>> proposals as part of the gender gap campaign, with the exception for
>>> urgent
>>> requests.
>>>
>> This means regular projects will not be accepted. That is effectively
>> shutting the grantmaking down.
>> Of course we will not let WLM to be shut down. But this grantmaking
>> shutting down is very demotivating and discouraging, for many organisers.
>>
>> This is also counter productive in solving the gender gap problem.
>>
>> Romaine
>>
>>
> --
> Ilario Valdelli
> Wikimedia CH
> Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
> Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
> Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
> Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
> Tel: +41764821371
> http://www.wikimedia.ch
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Mathias Damour
In reply to this post by Jane Darnell
Le 03/01/2015 14:58, Jane Darnell a écrit :

> As a member of the IEG committee I am happy to say that there is no need to
> panic. WLM is highly successful project and no one is talking about
> shutting it down, or any other project for that matter. The current
> campaign is scheduled to be one of hopefully many, targeted at the
> community in order to generate themed proposals. The current growth of
> highly diverse and inspirational proposals takes increasingly more energy
> to manage, judge, and maintain. By introducing a three-month long theme, it
> is hoped that the following will occur:
> 1) Grant committee members in their voluntary role as proposal reviewers
> and community sponsors will experience less burn-out in managing proposals
> as their will be more cross pollination per cohort of proposers and their
> proposals.
> 2) A targeted campaign to attract proposals will enable easier translation
> across projects if the target audience can be identified in advance
> 3) A targeted campaign will attract more volunteer committee members to
> manage proposals, hopefully attracting local experts in various Wikimedia
> projects.
>
> The Gendergap will be the first theme. I think it's a great idea! How can
> WLM attract more female participation? Any ideas?

No, I have ideas for other good projects, not this one.

I think that the capacity by the WMF - and actual action - to switch on
and off the grants without debate and even notice depending on such
thought and so-called campaign is prejudicial, like the capacity to
switch on and off the donations from one country like - say Russia - is
prejudicial too.

Le 03/01/2015 22:21, Romaine Wiki a écrit :
> The Grants page says
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Start : "Supporting mission-allied
> people and organizations around the world."
> This is not supporting, but demotivating, demolishing, discouraging, and
> frustrating the organizing volunteers.

More simply, I would say that "supporting" does not mean "governing" or
"piloting".

All things considered, Sue Gardner was eventually wrong. Give the
fundraising and the grantmaking back to the chapters.

--
Mathias Damour
User:Astirmays

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Josh Lim
In reply to this post by Romaine Wiki-2
Allow me to throw in some perspective here, since I think I stand somewhere between midway and the opposite end of the spectrum vis-à-vis this discussion.

> Wiadomość napisana przez Romaine Wiki <[hidden email]> w dniu 4 sty 2015, o godz. 05:21:
>
> Hi Ilario,
>
> As said before, that certain grant requests are submitted late, it doesn't
> mean it is a good idea.
>
> I was also not speaking about WLM organizers alone, but about all
> organizers in general.
> Shutting down the grantmaking for them is highly demotivating. Also when it
> does not effect them directly.

Wikimedia Philippines is still planning its 2015 annual plan, so for us, we don’t have a lot to lose from grantmaking opportunities lost due to the Grantmaking team’s focus on the gender gap.  And while I disagree with the method by which it was done—that we were only informed three weeks in advance—I’m inclined to believe that this makes affiliates more innovative with their programs.  If it means securing funding through doing programs that address the gender gap, then so be it if means expanding our skill set and helping woman participation in the process.

In addition, we’re exaggerating the impact of the gender gap focus here: note that Alex’s announcement said that they will focus on other grants either before February 1 or after April 30.  Them not accepting requests during that window need not mean that you can’t have a grant request already sitting pretty on Meta waiting for consideration; I think they were wrong in wording it, but I’m disinclined to believe that they will simply shoot requests down just because it fell during that window.

> It is effectively shutting down all projects that should start or are to be
> started in these three months. The Grants page says
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Start : "Supporting mission-allied
> people and organizations around the world."
> This is not supporting, but demotivating, demolishing, discouraging, and
> frustrating the organizing volunteers.
>
> Shutting down the grantmaking gives a strong negative signal to every
> organiser. "Your project is not important enough for the movement", that is
> what this campaign says.

I disagree.  There’s nothing in the grant process that prevents you from keeping the proposal as a draft until the window lapses, and projects need not be derailed just because funding can’t be secured between February 1 and April 30.  While I agree that it’s a big inconvenience for affiliates to see their calendars pushed back because they can’t get funding, I am also disinclined to believe that the signal this sends is as strong as you think it is.

I’ve organized projects for WMPH, and ultimately since we’re dependent on the Foundation for our funding, we’ve had to find ways to meet halfway with respect to when projects ought to be implemented.  For me, so long as the project is implemented, that’s fine with me regardless of when the project was implemented.  The important thing here is that we’re forwarding the movement nonetheless.

Thanks,

Josh

JAMES JOSHUA G. LIM
Bachelor of Arts in Political Science
Class of 2013, Ateneo de Manila University
Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines

[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]> | +63 (915) 321-7582
Facebook/Twitter: akiestar | Wikimedia: Sky Harbor
http://about.me/josh.lim <http://about.me/josh.lim>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Risker
In reply to this post by Lila Tretikov
Bumping....I do not see any response on this mailing list from the
Grantmaking team, and I can't actually find very much about this entire
plan on the Grants portal at Meta (which may say more about the grants
portal than about the dissemination of the plant).

However, since this is something that has the potential to affect a lot of
Wikimedians (individuals, chapters, and other affiliated groups)...as well
as women (apparently)... it would be really nice to see what is going on.
Some people have mentioned that they received an email.  Perhaps it could
be forwarded to this mailing list?

Risker/Anne

On 3 January 2015 at 13:35, Lila Tretikov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> For everyone here: I've asked our Grantmaking team to comment and clarify
> the details of this plan.
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Answering to Teemu and Chris:
> >
> > I do think that the for Wiki Loves Monuments and Wiki Loves Art it is
> safe
> > to claim that if we organize it the way we would always do, it would
> still
> > tip the gender balance in our community a little more to the female side.
> > However, I disagree that this should be a main consideration, because I
> > think that would be true for so many outreach projects. Focusing on that
> > would be a pity and a distraction imho. Also, for most participants we
> > don't know the gender, and we don't want to know the gender (because
> asking
> > for it alone can scare people away) - except for a sample of them, who
> > happen to answer the survey afterwards. All data on that is quite shaky.
> >
> > If necessary, I could easily make a case why WLM is a wonderful gendergap
> > project - the point is that I don't want volunteers to waste their time
> on
> > making such cases, but rather let them be innovative, come up with new
> > ideas instead of rebranding existing ideas on something like the
> gendergap.
> > My problems are more fundamental than 'I can't get money for my specific
> > project'.
> >
> > So Chris: yes, these people do a lot for reducing the gender gap in our
> > projects. Also, Wikimedia organizers tend to hop between projects - their
> > next might be more focused on a topic that is popular with women, if
> their
> > current idea isn't yet. Drawing them into a topic in a positive way (what
> > we do is cool! Join us!) tends to be more successful than telling them
> they
> > are not allowed to do other stuff (we won't fund you at all unless you do
> > this specific theme).
> >
> > Prioritisation sounds great, but that only works that way if you have one
> > clearly defined pool of resources, that you can actually control. What do
> > you think is the major bottle neck in organizing activities in the
> > Wikimedia movement? In my experience, that is not money, or even WMF
> staff
> > capacity (even though it is a limiting factor sometimes), but the primary
> > bottle neck is volunteer organizers (or editors). And volunteer time is
> not
> > a resource you can easily 'control'. If you want to influence it, the
> most
> > effective way is by persuading the volunteers why another angle is more
> > interesting, more fun, more effective.
> >
> > Best,
> > Lodewijk
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Chris Keating <
> [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Siko Bouterse
First day back from vacation, I'm drafting response as we speak, just
haven't sanity-checked enough to hit send yet :) Will soon!

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Risker <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Bumping....I do not see any response on this mailing list from the
> Grantmaking team, and I can't actually find very much about this entire
> plan on the Grants portal at Meta (which may say more about the grants
> portal than about the dissemination of the plant).
>
> However, since this is something that has the potential to affect a lot of
> Wikimedians (individuals, chapters, and other affiliated groups)...as well
> as women (apparently)... it would be really nice to see what is going on.
> Some people have mentioned that they received an email.  Perhaps it could
> be forwarded to this mailing list?
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 3 January 2015 at 13:35, Lila Tretikov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > For everyone here: I've asked our Grantmaking team to comment and clarify
> > the details of this plan.
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Answering to Teemu and Chris:
> > >
> > > I do think that the for Wiki Loves Monuments and Wiki Loves Art it is
> > safe
> > > to claim that if we organize it the way we would always do, it would
> > still
> > > tip the gender balance in our community a little more to the female
> side.
> > > However, I disagree that this should be a main consideration, because I
> > > think that would be true for so many outreach projects. Focusing on
> that
> > > would be a pity and a distraction imho. Also, for most participants we
> > > don't know the gender, and we don't want to know the gender (because
> > asking
> > > for it alone can scare people away) - except for a sample of them, who
> > > happen to answer the survey afterwards. All data on that is quite
> shaky.
> > >
> > > If necessary, I could easily make a case why WLM is a wonderful
> gendergap
> > > project - the point is that I don't want volunteers to waste their time
> > on
> > > making such cases, but rather let them be innovative, come up with new
> > > ideas instead of rebranding existing ideas on something like the
> > gendergap.
> > > My problems are more fundamental than 'I can't get money for my
> specific
> > > project'.
> > >
> > > So Chris: yes, these people do a lot for reducing the gender gap in our
> > > projects. Also, Wikimedia organizers tend to hop between projects -
> their
> > > next might be more focused on a topic that is popular with women, if
> > their
> > > current idea isn't yet. Drawing them into a topic in a positive way
> (what
> > > we do is cool! Join us!) tends to be more successful than telling them
> > they
> > > are not allowed to do other stuff (we won't fund you at all unless you
> do
> > > this specific theme).
> > >
> > > Prioritisation sounds great, but that only works that way if you have
> one
> > > clearly defined pool of resources, that you can actually control. What
> do
> > > you think is the major bottle neck in organizing activities in the
> > > Wikimedia movement? In my experience, that is not money, or even WMF
> > staff
> > > capacity (even though it is a limiting factor sometimes), but the
> primary
> > > bottle neck is volunteer organizers (or editors). And volunteer time is
> > not
> > > a resource you can easily 'control'. If you want to influence it, the
> > most
> > > effective way is by persuading the volunteers why another angle is more
> > > interesting, more fun, more effective.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Lodewijk
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Chris Keating <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--
Siko Bouterse
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

[hidden email]

*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. *
*Donate <https://donate.wikimedia.org> or click the "edit" button today,
and help us make it a reality!*
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Siko Bouterse
 Hi all,

This is not exactly how we were hoping to announce the Inspire Campaign on
this list, but now that I'm back online, let's try this again...

First, to clarify some key points:

*Yes, we are taking a 3 month break from funding regular
all-kinds-of-proposals in both IEG and PEG programs during February, March
and April.

*Time-sensitive funding needs that are not focused on the gender gap will
NOT be ignored during this period. The plan is not to ignore critical
community support requests that cannot wait. If there is a valid reason
that you cannot seek funding for your project/program/plan before February
or after April, please contact myself in IEG or Alex Wang in PEG and we'll
continue to work with our committees to assist you. Our experience has been
that many of the requests we receive CAN happen at any time of year,
however, and so we're simply asking you to propose those during the other 9
months of 2015. You are still welcome to continue drafting them during this
period, even though we won't have capacity to review all of them during
this time.

*The reason for taking a break from other non-urgent requests during this
time is so that we can run an experiment in proactive grantmaking, to see
if we can provide meaningful community support and significantly increase
impact on Wikimedia projects in a single strategic area.[1]

*We don't have enough staff to support all of our usual grantmaking work in
both of these programs AND try something new like this at the same time, so
we're going to focus our limited energy on 1 new experiment for a brief
while.

*The first Inspire Campaign will focus on the gender gap, future campaigns
could indeed focus on any other topic. Ideas for future campaign topics are
welcome! Our intention is not to shut down community ideas outside of
themes. Rather, we'd like to learn whether using a theme could actually
help drive participation in grantmaking and other areas of Wikimedia
projects, as it has for events like WLM.

*Like other experiments, we'll measure the results, and then decide if it
is worth repeating, or doing something different in the future. If WLM
wasn't such a great success, you wouldn't repeat it each year. If this
campaign isn't a success, we'll do something different instead.


To help us all get on the same page, I'm including below the email that was
sent to the IEG and PEG committees just before we went away for Christmas.
That has some more background information that may be helpful to folks just
learning about this experiment. And I'm happy to help clarify additional
questions as they come up here.

We're starting a FAQ where I've added answers to a few questions that came
up in this thread so far.[2] Please feel free to add more questions to that
page and we'll try to answer them in coming days/weeks.

Finally, about communications: Like many folks in this movement, our
grantmaking team at WMF surely has some room for improvement in terms of
timing and communications. Sometimes as plans develop with lots of
stakeholders (even just within one organization, let alone a whole
movement!) it takes time to get the news out to everyone in an orderly
fashion, and we're later than we'd like to be on this one.

More details for those interested in the meta-history of how this developed:
The idea of running thematic campaigns to experiment with proactively
asking for new ideas, reaching more individual grantees, and increasing
focused innovation around solving strategic issues was included in our
2014/15 annual plan. [3] (I don't expect you to have read this long and dry
document, just noting it was public). Part of the plan was an ask for
additional staff to help take on new initiatives like this in grantmaking,
so that we could continue existing programs as well as try something new
along thematic lines. In August I started the planning page on
meta-wiki.[1] Again, although we didn't formally announce anything on this
list because the details about staffing and execution were still so
unclear, it was public, and we started getting some initial positive
feedback on it at Wikimania etc. Over the past 3 months, it became
increasingly clear from conversations within WMF that grantmaking should
indeed experiment with proactive thematic focus, but that no additional
resources should be expected to assist with this. So, in December, we
gathered a team of existing staff to sort out what kind of first experiment
we could conceivably execute on in time for a campaign aligned with
WikiWomen's March. We started communications first with some key
stakeholders - both committees and a list of PEG grantees that Alex knew
might be working on new proposals in early 2015 who needed as much notice
as possible. And believe me, we definitely wish we had more time too. We'd
planned to announce more broadly to this list and others as well as
updating the PEG and IEG pages once all involved staff were back from
vacation in January and could do this right. Many of us don't read mailing
lists while taking time off, and I don't like to start conversations that I
don't have time to continue. Going forward, once my colleague Alex returns
to work next week, we'll send around even more details, address some of the
PEG-specific questions you may have that only she can answer, etc.

Meanwhile, I invite you to:
1. Let us know if you've got an urgent funding need that you can't propose
before February, so we can help you get timely support.
2. Share further questions on the FAQ page or in this thread.
3. Let us know if you're interested in helping with this first campaign
(serving on the committee, volunteering with communications or community
organizing, working on ideas in IdeaLab, etc)
4. Imagine what other kinds of themes we might try for future campaigns, if
this first one is successful.
5. Keep kindly letting us know what does and doesn't work for you. We'd
like to think we're a work in progress :)

Best wishes and Happy New Year to all,
Siko

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire_Grants_%E2%80%93_Gender_gap_campaign

[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire_Grants_%E2%80%93_Gender_gap_campaign/FAQs

[3]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=File:2014-15_Wikimedia_Foundation_Plan.pdf&page=17

------

[Original Announcement Email to IEG committee for further reference]

Hi IEG Committee,

This long email is going to contain some important news about our next
round, so please read!

As participatory grantmakers, we know that what makes our process special
is how involved you all are in selecting, advising, and supporting grantees
where they are. So far, WMF's grantmaking has been responsive to whatever
projects and plans the community has brought to us for funding. This
responsiveness is important, but we're also seeing that there may be an
opportunity to try something proactive too. Other grantmakers have found
that focusing campaigns or contests around a given theme can help generate
new grantees, new ideas for high-quality proposals, and target innovation
around strategic issues.[1]

We've never yet run a targeted campaign to bring in ideas focused on a
particular issue or theme, and this is the new challenge we've set for
ourselves this year.  To make this happen, we’re going to follow the advice
we often give our own grantees: don't spread yourself too thin, try
focusing on one thing and see what impact you can have there.

As such, we're asking you to join us for an experiment in early 2015: we’re
excited to be launching our first Inspire Campaign, a global grantmaking
campaign to proactively source and support new projects aimed at addressing
a specific strategic topic. To do this, we're going to take a short break
from our regular IEG and PEG grantmaking routines, and instead run a joint
campaign. With one campaign, we'll gather proposals for new projects aimed
at addressing one strategic topic, and work together to select the best
ideas for either PEG or IEG funding.

This first pilot campaign will focus on addressing the gender gap.[2]

Our goals are two-fold:

1. Experiment with running scalable themed campaigns in IdeaLab to incubate
more high-quality projects and grant proposals aimed at having a focused
strategic impact on Wikimedia projects.

2. Proactively support community initiatives aimed at increasing gender
diversity in contributors to, and content of, Wikimedia projects.

Why the gender gap? Although we’ve committed to supporting and increasing
gender diversity, so far these kinds of projects haven’t emerged
organically at any meaningful scale. In the first half of this year, IEG
and PEG have spent only 9% of funds on projects aiming to directly impact
this gap and less than ⅓ of our grantee project leaders have been women.
Without taking time to focus on increasing gender diversity in our content
and contributors, this trend is likely to continue. Individual Engagement
Grants and Project and Event Grants could support such initiatives, and
we're interested to learn how specifically inviting proposals in this area
might have an impact.

To create a feasible experiment , we will dedicate round 1 of IEG funding
and 3 months of PEG funding to the campaign. From February 1-April 30, PEG
will only accept proposals as part of the gender gap campaign, with the
exception for urgent requests. And IEG's first round of the year will be
entirely devoted to this experiment (because experiments are, after all,
what IEG thrives on). We have a combined budget of $250,000 for the
campaign. Based on what we learn from the pilot, we may then decide to
continue running regular campaigns on other topics (imagine sourcing more
projects to support small languages, or a new suite of tools for
microcontributions), try a different experiment, or simply go back to how
things were before.

We hope to bring together the experience and skills of both committees, and
will be creating an Inspire committee to review proposals. *Please let us
know by January 31st if you would like to join this campaign committee
focused on funding gender diversity!*

Those of you who don’t choose to join this first campaign committee will
get a few months break from reviewing new proposals. But you will still be
needed on the PEG and IEG committees to follow up with existing IEG and PEG
grantees, reading reports and offering support and advice to them as those
projects continue to move forward.

As IEG and PEG committee members, we hope you will support this experiment
by spreading the word in your communities, mentoring projects and grantees,
and helping us learn how we can improve the campaign model. We will be
publicizing the campaign in January and February with the aim to launch the
campaign March 4th and to make decisions on grants in April.

Let us know if you have questions, concerns, or ideas!

Wishing you a warm end to 2014 meanwhile and looking forward to connecting
with you in the New Year.

Cheers,
Siko and Alex

[1] http://www.knightfoundation.org/opencontests/
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire_Grants_%E2%80%93_Gender_gap_campaign


On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Siko Bouterse <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> First day back from vacation, I'm drafting response as we speak, just
> haven't sanity-checked enough to hit send yet :) Will soon!
>
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Risker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Bumping....I do not see any response on this mailing list from the
>> Grantmaking team, and I can't actually find very much about this entire
>> plan on the Grants portal at Meta (which may say more about the grants
>> portal than about the dissemination of the plant).
>>
>> However, since this is something that has the potential to affect a lot of
>> Wikimedians (individuals, chapters, and other affiliated groups)...as well
>> as women (apparently)... it would be really nice to see what is going on.
>> Some people have mentioned that they received an email.  Perhaps it could
>> be forwarded to this mailing list?
>>
>> Risker/Anne
>>
>> On 3 January 2015 at 13:35, Lila Tretikov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> > For everyone here: I've asked our Grantmaking team to comment and
>> clarify
>> > the details of this plan.
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Answering to Teemu and Chris:
>> > >
>> > > I do think that the for Wiki Loves Monuments and Wiki Loves Art it is
>> > safe
>> > > to claim that if we organize it the way we would always do, it would
>> > still
>> > > tip the gender balance in our community a little more to the female
>> side.
>> > > However, I disagree that this should be a main consideration, because
>> I
>> > > think that would be true for so many outreach projects. Focusing on
>> that
>> > > would be a pity and a distraction imho. Also, for most participants we
>> > > don't know the gender, and we don't want to know the gender (because
>> > asking
>> > > for it alone can scare people away) - except for a sample of them, who
>> > > happen to answer the survey afterwards. All data on that is quite
>> shaky.
>> > >
>> > > If necessary, I could easily make a case why WLM is a wonderful
>> gendergap
>> > > project - the point is that I don't want volunteers to waste their
>> time
>> > on
>> > > making such cases, but rather let them be innovative, come up with new
>> > > ideas instead of rebranding existing ideas on something like the
>> > gendergap.
>> > > My problems are more fundamental than 'I can't get money for my
>> specific
>> > > project'.
>> > >
>> > > So Chris: yes, these people do a lot for reducing the gender gap in
>> our
>> > > projects. Also, Wikimedia organizers tend to hop between projects -
>> their
>> > > next might be more focused on a topic that is popular with women, if
>> > their
>> > > current idea isn't yet. Drawing them into a topic in a positive way
>> (what
>> > > we do is cool! Join us!) tends to be more successful than telling them
>> > they
>> > > are not allowed to do other stuff (we won't fund you at all unless
>> you do
>> > > this specific theme).
>> > >
>> > > Prioritisation sounds great, but that only works that way if you have
>> one
>> > > clearly defined pool of resources, that you can actually control.
>> What do
>> > > you think is the major bottle neck in organizing activities in the
>> > > Wikimedia movement? In my experience, that is not money, or even WMF
>> > staff
>> > > capacity (even though it is a limiting factor sometimes), but the
>> primary
>> > > bottle neck is volunteer organizers (or editors). And volunteer time
>> is
>> > not
>> > > a resource you can easily 'control'. If you want to influence it, the
>> > most
>> > > effective way is by persuading the volunteers why another angle is
>> more
>> > > interesting, more fun, more effective.
>> > >
>> > > Best,
>> > > Lodewijk
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Chris Keating <
>> > [hidden email]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > 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
>> > > > [hidden email]
>> > > > Unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
>> ?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > > [hidden email]
>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>> ,
>> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > [hidden email]
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> [hidden email]
>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@...>
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Siko Bouterse
> Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
>
> [hidden email]
>
> *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. *
> *Donate <https://donate.wikimedia.org> or click the "edit" button today,
> and help us make it a reality!*
>



--
Siko Bouterse
Head of Individual Engagement Grants
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

[hidden email]

*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. *
*Donate <https://donate.wikimedia.org> or click the "edit" button today,
and help us make it a reality!*
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Siko Bouterse wrote:
>Why the gender gap? Although we’ve committed to supporting and increasing
>gender diversity, so far these kinds of projects haven’t emerged
>organically at any meaningful scale. In the first half of this year, IEG
>and PEG have spent only 9% of funds on projects aiming to directly impact
>this gap and less than ? of our grantee project leaders have been women.
>Without taking time to focus on increasing gender diversity in our content
>and contributors, this trend is likely to continue.

What evidence is there that spending more on "gender gap" will have any
measurable impact on "gender gap"? I also note that you say "projects"
have not "emerged". That sounds like people do not actually have ideas
how to "impact" "gender gap" with money. Could you identify a couple of
projects that would have considerable "impact" on "gender gap" but that
have been refused funding in the past due to a lack of "focus" on "gen-
der gap"?
--
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:[hidden email] · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
 Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015)  · http://www.websitedev.de/ 

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Peter Southwood
Did you not see the bit about "experimental"?
Cheers,
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bjoern Hoehrmann
Sent: 06 January 2015 05:48 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

* Siko Bouterse wrote:
>Why the gender gap? Although we’ve committed to supporting and
>increasing gender diversity, so far these kinds of projects haven’t
>emerged organically at any meaningful scale. In the first half of this
>year, IEG and PEG have spent only 9% of funds on projects aiming to
>directly impact this gap and less than ? of our grantee project leaders have been women.
>Without taking time to focus on increasing gender diversity in our
>content and contributors, this trend is likely to continue.

What evidence is there that spending more on "gender gap" will have any measurable impact on "gender gap"? I also note that you say "projects"
have not "emerged". That sounds like people do not actually have ideas how to "impact" "gender gap" with money. Could you identify a couple of projects that would have considerable "impact" on "gender gap" but that have been refused funding in the past due to a lack of "focus" on "gen- der gap"?
--
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:[hidden email] · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de  Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015)  · http://www.websitedev.de/ 

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5577 / Virus Database: 4257/8874 - Release Date: 01/05/15


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
1234