[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

Lodewijk
Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more
successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that
such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that
assumption though.

I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it
is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still
apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests.

I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that
is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment)
and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker
run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce
the damaging side effect significantly.

Lodewijk

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> 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>
>
_______________________________________________
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
Thanks for the details Siko!

Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be
concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3
months for no good reason.

However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent
grantmaking is being postponed; and there is a good rationale for it (one
more about wanting to experiment with grantmaking styles, than about the
gender gap being a special case).

Makes sense to me.

Chris


On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more
> successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that
> such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that
> assumption though.
>
> I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it
> is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still
> apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests.
>
> I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that
> is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment)
> and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker
> run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce
> the damaging side effect significantly.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > 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>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Anders Wennersten-2
Thanks Siko, also from me.

I do hope that  you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of
grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in
defining expectations targets etc in a specific area

For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more
female contributors.  It was funded from outside WMF and primary
involved workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all familiar
with. The workshops was run in different middlesized towns and got a
very limited attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny fraction
stayed on as Wikipedians after the workshop.   I got annoyed at first
noticing it cost something like 100-200 dollar per participant, and 20
times as much to get the one among them who stayed on  but only making
some 50-100 edits. I saw it as a truly waste of money (not WMF though).

But then I learned that those activities attracted more media attention
than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must now be
between 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and radio
stations.  And the funding body saw this as a thundering success, and
has given even more funding for a second year. And then something
happened as a result from this media coverage, more female editors has
now a year later turned up!

Anders




Chris Keating skrev den 2015-01-06 10:53:

> Thanks for the details Siko!
>
> Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be
> concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3
> months for no good reason.
>
> However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent
> grantmaking is being postponed; and there is a good rationale for it (one
> more about wanting to experiment with grantmaking styles, than about the
> gender gap being a special case).
>
> Makes sense to me.
>
> Chris
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more
>> successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that
>> such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that
>> assumption though.
>>
>> I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it
>> is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still
>> apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests.
>>
>> I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that
>> is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment)
>> and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker
>> run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce
>> the damaging side effect significantly.
>>
>> Lodewijk
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> 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>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 Lodewijk
At the opposite I consider that the limited time cannot produce
long-time effect, it's not rare that some good grants proceed to submit
a second phase to have a larger impact.

The best would be to check afterwards the impact of the solution of
"promotion" of a specific area and a specific topic.

A program needs longer support, this is also the lesson learned by WLM
(the discussion is started because the WLM team considers that few
months cannot support a bigger program).

The grantmaking team is doing what the WLM team did some years ago:
supporting a specific topic. WLM has been successful, probably would
have created a lesser impact if someone suggested to reduce the
organization of the event to 2-4 weeks.

Anyway the best is to check the feedback from the community in terms of
projects submitted to the grantmaking team.

There is no reason at the moment to say that there will be damaging effects.

If there are a bad results, the best wold be to analyze the reasons and
to proceed to learn a lesson and to check what can be set to have a
better process.

At the moment the experiemnt is focused to give "more opportunities" to
a specific area, I don't see nothing strange on that.

Regards

On 06.01.2015 07:59, Lodewijk wrote:
> I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that
> is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment)
> and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker
> run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce
> the damaging side effect significantly.
>
> 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

Ilario Valdelli
In reply to this post by Anders Wennersten-2
Hi Anders,
my 2 cents. A project has a budget, this budget can be financed
externally but there are some countries which have more opportunities
than others.

In addition (it's my personal point of view) the external funding
introduces a bigger complexity to the projects in terms of management of
sponsors and external funders (matching the strategies of WMF and to
apply for WMF funds is not the same to find a compromise with the
strategies and the accountability of the external funders). In my
opinion the external funds generate the request to have some additional
skills in the team of the project and probably longer time to setup the
project.

In the other hand it would be easier to find external funds if a
program/project has already generated some good results. In your example
you say that the second year the project received more funds, but you
have been lucky to find someone trusting on you the first year.

For this reason I can apply your example more to WLM than to gender gap
because WLM has already a well established history and very good results
to attract external funds, instead of some other new projects requiring
to be "incubated" more.

Regards


On 06.01.2015 11:37, Anders Wennersten wrote:

> Thanks Siko, also from me.
>
> I do hope that  you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of
> grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in
> defining expectations targets etc in a specific area
>
> For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more
> female contributors.  It was funded from outside WMF and primary
> involved workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all
> familiar with. The workshops was run in different middlesized towns
> and got a very limited attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny
> fraction stayed on as Wikipedians after the workshop.   I got annoyed
> at first noticing it cost something like 100-200 dollar per
> participant, and 20 times as much to get the one among them who stayed
> on  but only making some 50-100 edits. I saw it as a truly waste of
> money (not WMF though).
>
> But then I learned that those activities attracted more media
> attention than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must
> now be between 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and
> radio stations.  And the funding body saw this as a thundering
> success, and has given even more funding for a second year. And then
> something happened as a result from this media coverage, more female
> editors has now a year later turned up!
>
> Anders
>
>
>
>

--
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

Anders Wennersten-2
Ilario,

My point is rather that while WLM has a clear-cut dynamic,  "put in
resources->get photos in Commons", I believe that in the area of
gender-gap the dynamic could be more complex (as in my example).

And if WMF only want to see a direct link between effort and impact,
they could miss out other dynamics. And in my example I think the
funding body never even asked it the number of female editors in
Wikipedia increased, for them   the media coverage was a more concrete
and satisfying result (I wonder if this would be true for WMF grantmaking?)

Anders

Ilario Valdelli skrev den 2015-01-06 12:00:

> Hi Anders,
> my 2 cents. A project has a budget, this budget can be financed
> externally but there are some countries which have more opportunities
> than others.
>
> In addition (it's my personal point of view) the external funding
> introduces a bigger complexity to the projects in terms of management
> of sponsors and external funders (matching the strategies of WMF and
> to apply for WMF funds is not the same to find a compromise with the
> strategies and the accountability of the external funders). In my
> opinion the external funds generate the request to have some
> additional skills in the team of the project and probably longer time
> to setup the project.
>
> In the other hand it would be easier to find external funds if a
> program/project has already generated some good results. In your
> example you say that the second year the project received more funds,
> but you have been lucky to find someone trusting on you the first year.
>
> For this reason I can apply your example more to WLM than to gender
> gap because WLM has already a well established history and very good
> results to attract external funds, instead of some other new projects
> requiring to be "incubated" more.
>
> Regards
>
>
> On 06.01.2015 11:37, Anders Wennersten wrote:
>> Thanks Siko, also from me.
>>
>> I do hope that  you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of
>> grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in
>> defining expectations targets etc in a specific area
>>
>> For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more
>> female contributors.  It was funded from outside WMF and primary
>> involved workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all
>> familiar with. The workshops was run in different middlesized towns
>> and got a very limited attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny
>> fraction stayed on as Wikipedians after the workshop.   I got annoyed
>> at first noticing it cost something like 100-200 dollar per
>> participant, and 20 times as much to get the one among them who
>> stayed on  but only making some 50-100 edits. I saw it as a truly
>> waste of money (not WMF though).
>>
>> But then I learned that those activities attracted more media
>> attention than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must
>> now be between 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and
>> radio stations.  And the funding body saw this as a thundering
>> success, and has given even more funding for a second year. And then
>> something happened as a result from this media coverage, more female
>> editors has now a year later turned up!
>>
>> Anders
>>
>>
>>
>>
>


_______________________________________________
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
It's also my point considering that to get external funds probably a
team (like WLM) can bu pushed to find a stronger impact outside
Wikimedia movement in order to get more external funds.

The Gender gap has a stronger potentiality because is more flexible to
be adapted to external funds, but my expectation is that the teams
submitting the request of grants can also learn the ability to setup a
good project and good reports and to reach a maturity consisting in the
capacity to "design" interesting projects for external funds (also for
the global South).

Basically to build a "best practice" in these terms: "someting that
enable organizations to deliver benefits, return on investment, and
value on investment through a sustained approach" (ITIL definition).

In my opinion the experience of WM SWE can become a best practice but
for "mature" teams.

regards

On 06.01.2015 12:26, Anders Wennersten wrote:

> Ilario,
>
> My point is rather that while WLM has a clear-cut dynamic,  "put in
> resources->get photos in Commons", I believe that in the area of
> gender-gap the dynamic could be more complex (as in my example).
>
> And if WMF only want to see a direct link between effort and impact,
> they could miss out other dynamics. And in my example I think the
> funding body never even asked it the number of female editors in
> Wikipedia increased, for them   the media coverage was a more concrete
> and satisfying result (I wonder if this would be true for WMF
> grantmaking?)
>
> Anders
>

--
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

Federico Leva (Nemo)
In reply to this post by Anders Wennersten-2
Anders Wennersten, 06/01/2015 12:26:
> I believe that in the area of gender-gap the dynamic could be more
> complex (as in my example).
>
> And if WMF only want to see a direct link between effort and impact,
> they could miss out other dynamics.

I think this is always a good point to remind ourselves, thanks for your
example (and self-criticism).

Nemo

_______________________________________________
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
In reply to this post by Lodewijk
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more
> successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that
> such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that
> assumption though.
>
> I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it
> is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still
> apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests.
>
> I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that
> is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment)
> and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker
> run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce
> the damaging side effect significantly.
>

The campaign itself will only run for a month - in my experience with past
open calls for IEG, you really do need more than 2 weeks to get the word
out and get new ideas not only started but also developed w/ enough
community input that we rely on to assess which grants should move forward.
But in addition to the actual campaign itself, we need to bake in enough
time to prepare for it beforehand and get funded projects started
afterwards. There is significant staff effort behind the scenes for any
grantmaking we do, and in my experience even quick pilots take time to prep
and wrapup.

I'm hearing your concerns loud and clear, still, and agree it will be
interesting to see how many truly time-sensitive requests will come up
during this period. If the campaign is deemed a success worth repeating and
we also find we're over-stretching those involved (staff and volunteers)
because many non-theme focused projects need to be concurrently considered
(this is a big concern for me, and something we'll be keeping a close eye
on), that could be data-driven rationale for resourcing grantmaking
differently in next year's annual plan.

Siko



> Lodewijk
>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > 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>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
In reply to this post by Anders Wennersten-2
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Anders Wennersten <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Thanks Siko, also from me.
>
> I do hope that  you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of
> grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in defining
> expectations targets etc in a specific area
>
> For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more female
> contributors.  It was funded from outside WMF and primary involved
> workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all familiar with. The
> workshops was run in different middlesized towns and got a very limited
> attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny fraction stayed on as
> Wikipedians after the workshop.   I got annoyed at first noticing it cost
> something like 100-200 dollar per participant, and 20 times as much to get
> the one among them who stayed on  but only making some 50-100 edits. I saw
> it as a truly waste of money (not WMF though).
>
> But then I learned that those activities attracted more media attention
> than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must now be between
> 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and radio stations.  And the
> funding body saw this as a thundering success, and has given even more
> funding for a second year. And then something happened as a result from
> this media coverage, more female editors has now a year later turned up!
>
> Anders
>
>
Thanks for sharing this example, Anders. We're definitely going to learn a
lot from this experiment, as I am from this discussion, and will be sharing
back findings too :)

Your point about media interest as well as longer term impact is super
important. While we do need to be able to demonstrate some short-term
impact, I also think that for many of the grants we make the impact can
really only seen much more clearly in the longer term. So following up well
after the pilot is over will also be important.

I don't usually think that media coverage alone = thundering success (like
you, I'd probably have been disappointed at first with the early outcomes
you mentioned). But I do see that one possible outcome for campaigns like
this is increased media coverage which in turn could result in longer term
impact by bringing in more people to the projects. Will be on the lookout
for this - glad you mentioned it!

Siko


>
>
> Chris Keating skrev den 2015-01-06 10:53:
>
>  Thanks for the details Siko!
>>
>> Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be
>> concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3
>> months for no good reason.
>>
>> However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent
>> grantmaking is being postponed; and there is a good rationale for it (one
>> more about wanting to experiment with grantmaking styles, than about the
>> gender gap being a special case).
>>
>> Makes sense to me.
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more
>>> successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that
>>> such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that
>>> assumption though.
>>>
>>> I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it
>>> is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still
>>> apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests.
>>>
>>> I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program
>>> (that
>>> is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an
>>> experiment)
>>> and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker
>>> run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would
>>> reduce
>>> the damaging side effect significantly.
>>>
>>> Lodewijk
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood <
>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>  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>
>>>>
>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> 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

MF-Warburg-2
Sorry if this was already answered and I overlooked it, but will there be
something like a special form of "advertising" this campaign in order to
attract many requests that propose to do something about the Gender Gap?

2015-01-06 21:11 GMT+01:00 Siko Bouterse <[hidden email]>:

> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Anders Wennersten <
> [hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Siko, also from me.
> >
> > I do hope that  you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of
> > grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in defining
> > expectations targets etc in a specific area
> >
> > For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more
> female
> > contributors.  It was funded from outside WMF and primary involved
> > workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all familiar with. The
> > workshops was run in different middlesized towns and got a very limited
> > attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny fraction stayed on as
> > Wikipedians after the workshop.   I got annoyed at first noticing it cost
> > something like 100-200 dollar per participant, and 20 times as much to
> get
> > the one among them who stayed on  but only making some 50-100 edits. I
> saw
> > it as a truly waste of money (not WMF though).
> >
> > But then I learned that those activities attracted more media attention
> > than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must now be between
> > 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and radio stations.  And
> the
> > funding body saw this as a thundering success, and has given even more
> > funding for a second year. And then something happened as a result from
> > this media coverage, more female editors has now a year later turned up!
> >
> > Anders
> >
> >
> Thanks for sharing this example, Anders. We're definitely going to learn a
> lot from this experiment, as I am from this discussion, and will be sharing
> back findings too :)
>
> Your point about media interest as well as longer term impact is super
> important. While we do need to be able to demonstrate some short-term
> impact, I also think that for many of the grants we make the impact can
> really only seen much more clearly in the longer term. So following up well
> after the pilot is over will also be important.
>
> I don't usually think that media coverage alone = thundering success (like
> you, I'd probably have been disappointed at first with the early outcomes
> you mentioned). But I do see that one possible outcome for campaigns like
> this is increased media coverage which in turn could result in longer term
> impact by bringing in more people to the projects. Will be on the lookout
> for this - glad you mentioned it!
>
> Siko
>
>
> >
> >
> > Chris Keating skrev den 2015-01-06 10:53:
> >
> >  Thanks for the details Siko!
> >>
> >> Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be
> >> concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects
> for 3
> >> months for no good reason.
> >>
> >> However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent
> >> grantmaking is being postponed; and there is a good rationale for it
> (one
> >> more about wanting to experiment with grantmaking styles, than about the
> >> gender gap being a special case).
> >>
> >> Makes sense to me.
> >>
> >> Chris
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>  Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more
> >>> successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption
> that
> >>> such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that
> >>> assumption though.
> >>>
> >>> I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way
> it
> >>> is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can
> still
> >>> apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests.
> >>>
> >>> I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program
> >>> (that
> >>> is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an
> >>> experiment)
> >>> and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker
> >>> run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would
> >>> reduce
> >>> the damaging side effect significantly.
> >>>
> >>> Lodewijk
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood <
> >>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  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>
> >>>>
> >>>>  _______________________________________________
> >>> 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>
>
_______________________________________________
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
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 12:17 PM, MF-Warburg <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Sorry if this was already answered and I overlooked it, but will there be
> something like a special form of "advertising" this campaign in order to
> attract many requests that propose to do something about the Gender Gap?
>

Great question. Current thinking is to do the usual announcing on mailing
lists, blog/social media, village pumps, etc, as well as experimenting with
running Central Notice banners. Would like to attract folks from various
wikis who have interest in this theme and ability to lead a project in
their community, beyond the usual (relatively small) slice who regularly
participate in lists like these or in the usual grantmaking discussions on
meta-wiki. And although outside media could help bring total newbies to
contribute ideas, discussion, and other forms of participation, it is
pretty darn important to have at least 1 experienced Wikimedian on a funded
team in order to lead and execute a useful community project, so
in-movement (particularly on-wiki) promotion is a priority. Any
thoughts/suggestions would be welcome!


> 2015-01-06 21:11 GMT+01:00 Siko Bouterse <[hidden email]>:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Anders Wennersten <
> > [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Siko, also from me.
> > >
> > > I do hope that  you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of
> > > grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in
> defining
> > > expectations targets etc in a specific area
> > >
> > > For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more
> > female
> > > contributors.  It was funded from outside WMF and primary involved
> > > workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all familiar with.
> The
> > > workshops was run in different middlesized towns and got a very limited
> > > attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny fraction stayed on as
> > > Wikipedians after the workshop.   I got annoyed at first noticing it
> cost
> > > something like 100-200 dollar per participant, and 20 times as much to
> > get
> > > the one among them who stayed on  but only making some 50-100 edits. I
> > saw
> > > it as a truly waste of money (not WMF though).
> > >
> > > But then I learned that those activities attracted more media attention
> > > than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must now be
> between
> > > 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and radio stations.  And
> > the
> > > funding body saw this as a thundering success, and has given even more
> > > funding for a second year. And then something happened as a result from
> > > this media coverage, more female editors has now a year later turned
> up!
> > >
> > > Anders
> > >
> > >
> > Thanks for sharing this example, Anders. We're definitely going to learn
> a
> > lot from this experiment, as I am from this discussion, and will be
> sharing
> > back findings too :)
> >
> > Your point about media interest as well as longer term impact is super
> > important. While we do need to be able to demonstrate some short-term
> > impact, I also think that for many of the grants we make the impact can
> > really only seen much more clearly in the longer term. So following up
> well
> > after the pilot is over will also be important.
> >
> > I don't usually think that media coverage alone = thundering success
> (like
> > you, I'd probably have been disappointed at first with the early outcomes
> > you mentioned). But I do see that one possible outcome for campaigns like
> > this is increased media coverage which in turn could result in longer
> term
> > impact by bringing in more people to the projects. Will be on the lookout
> > for this - glad you mentioned it!
> >
> > Siko
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Chris Keating skrev den 2015-01-06 10:53:
> > >
> > >  Thanks for the details Siko!
> > >>
> > >> Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be
> > >> concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects
> > for 3
> > >> months for no good reason.
> > >>
> > >> However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent
> > >> grantmaking is being postponed; and there is a good rationale for it
> > (one
> > >> more about wanting to experiment with grantmaking styles, than about
> the
> > >> gender gap being a special case).
> > >>
> > >> Makes sense to me.
> > >>
> > >> Chris
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>  Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more
> > >>> successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption
> > that
> > >>> such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that
> > >>> assumption though.
> > >>>
> > >>> I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the
> way
> > it
> > >>> is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can
> > still
> > >>> apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few
> requests.
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program
> > >>> (that
> > >>> is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an
> > >>> experiment)
> > >>> and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker
> > >>> run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would
> > >>> reduce
> > >>> the damaging side effect significantly.
> > >>>
> > >>> Lodewijk
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood <
> > >>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>  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>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  _______________________________________________
> > >>> 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>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Liam Wyatt
On 7 January 2015 at 00:06, Siko Bouterse <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 12:17 PM, MF-Warburg <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Sorry if this was already answered and I overlooked it, but will there be
> > something like a special form of "advertising" this campaign in order to
> > attract many requests that propose to do something about the Gender Gap?
> >
>
> Great question. Current thinking is to do the usual announcing on mailing
> lists, blog/social media, village pumps, etc, as well as experimenting with
> running Central Notice banners. Would like to attract folks from various
> wikis who have interest in this theme and ability to lead a project in
> their community, beyond the usual (relatively small) slice who regularly
> participate in lists like these or in the usual grantmaking discussions on
> meta-wiki. And although outside media could help bring total newbies to
> contribute ideas, discussion, and other forms of participation, it is
> pretty darn important to have at least 1 experienced Wikimedian on a funded
> team in order to lead and execute a useful community project, so
> in-movement (particularly on-wiki) promotion is a priority. Any
> thoughts/suggestions would be welcome!
>

TL:DR I see the stick, but where is the carrot? [1]

I understand from the explanations that the reason for not accepting
any non-gender-gap focused grants for several months is because of the
expected workload on the staff in reviewing applications and
supporting the projects that do get funded.

However, what I don't understand is what added incentive there is for
people to submit grant applications on the chosen topic (in this
instance it is gender-gap, but it could be other topics in the
future)? Since it is already possible to submit a gender-gap focused
grant, how does the refusal to accept other kinds of project
submissions increase the number/quality/variety of gender-gap grants?
I can see the unfortunate possibility for:
-  some grants to be re-written with a false veneer of gender-gap
focus ("pink-washing") simply to access the money
- valid (but non gender-gap focused) grant applications having to wait
until after the 3-month project, and potentially having to cancel
altogether depending on the volunteer's availability.

I think this is what Lodewijk was referring to when he called it a
"negative campaign" - there is a DISincentive for other kinds of grant
applications, but no apparent specific incentive for the desired type
of application.

I see the stick, but where is the carrot?
Am I missing something?

-Liam
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrot_and_stick

_______________________________________________
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

rupert THURNER-2
Maybe the carrot is the site notice to advertise it, and the fear is that
too many projects are being proposed? Which is good. But I am with lodewijk
that this is not the way to go. It only exposes the main weakness of the
current grant making process. It is global, central and has a lot of
administrative overhead attached to it,  mainly driven by Anglo American
policies difficult to understand in the rest of the world why they would be
necessary at all.  it leads to a bottleneck not necessary.

The sitenotice is nice. But it could be used better if grantmaking is
distributed like all the other content and community work, imo.

Rupert
On Jan 7, 2015 5:56 PM, "Liam Wyatt" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 7 January 2015 at 00:06, Siko Bouterse <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 12:17 PM, MF-Warburg <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry if this was already answered and I overlooked it, but will there
> be
> > > something like a special form of "advertising" this campaign in order
> to
> > > attract many requests that propose to do something about the Gender
> Gap?
> > >
> >
> > Great question. Current thinking is to do the usual announcing on mailing
> > lists, blog/social media, village pumps, etc, as well as experimenting
> with
> > running Central Notice banners. Would like to attract folks from various
> > wikis who have interest in this theme and ability to lead a project in
> > their community, beyond the usual (relatively small) slice who regularly
> > participate in lists like these or in the usual grantmaking discussions
> on
> > meta-wiki. And although outside media could help bring total newbies to
> > contribute ideas, discussion, and other forms of participation, it is
> > pretty darn important to have at least 1 experienced Wikimedian on a
> funded
> > team in order to lead and execute a useful community project, so
> > in-movement (particularly on-wiki) promotion is a priority. Any
> > thoughts/suggestions would be welcome!
> >
>
> TL:DR I see the stick, but where is the carrot? [1]
>
> I understand from the explanations that the reason for not accepting
> any non-gender-gap focused grants for several months is because of the
> expected workload on the staff in reviewing applications and
> supporting the projects that do get funded.
>
> However, what I don't understand is what added incentive there is for
> people to submit grant applications on the chosen topic (in this
> instance it is gender-gap, but it could be other topics in the
> future)? Since it is already possible to submit a gender-gap focused
> grant, how does the refusal to accept other kinds of project
> submissions increase the number/quality/variety of gender-gap grants?
> I can see the unfortunate possibility for:
> -  some grants to be re-written with a false veneer of gender-gap
> focus ("pink-washing") simply to access the money
> - valid (but non gender-gap focused) grant applications having to wait
> until after the 3-month project, and potentially having to cancel
> altogether depending on the volunteer's availability.
>
> I think this is what Lodewijk was referring to when he called it a
> "negative campaign" - there is a DISincentive for other kinds of grant
> applications, but no apparent specific incentive for the desired type
> of application.
>
> I see the stick, but where is the carrot?
> Am I missing something?
>
> -Liam
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrot_and_stick
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Bjoern Hoehrmann
In reply to this post by Liam Wyatt
* Liam Wyatt wrote:

>I understand from the explanations that the reason for not accepting
>any non-gender-gap focused grants for several months is because of the
>expected workload on the staff in reviewing applications and
>supporting the projects that do get funded.
>
>However, what I don't understand is what added incentive there is for
>people to submit grant applications on the chosen topic (in this
>instance it is gender-gap, but it could be other topics in the
>future)? Since it is already possible to submit a gender-gap focused
>grant, how does the refusal to accept other kinds of project
>submissions increase the number/quality/variety of gender-gap grants?

One reason would be that anyone interested in applying for a gender-
gap focused grant will have to do it now, since odds of success will
be very low for such applications after the three months.
--
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

Sydney Poore
In reply to this post by Romaine Wiki-2
Values. It is a matter of values.

If you believe, as I do, that lack of diversity of Wikimedia projects is
seriously compromising the content of the projects then designing a
campaign that addresses one or more aspects of this concern is a reasonable
top priority even if it displaces other interests/values.

It has become pretty obvious that funding the interests/values of existing
community members through regular channels is not creating content free of
systemic bias in general nor closing the human gender gap. (I say this as
someone who has read all types of WMF funding proposals and evaluations of
for several years now.)

Temporarily doing a 3 month targeted Gender Gap experimental campaign is a
modest approach to take in addressing one of the biggest weaknesses of
Wikimedia Foundation projects. The reaction of some members of the
community was predictable, because it is evident in the majority of
previous and current funding requests that increasing the diversity of the
larger Wikimedia movement is secondary priority of most existing people and
organizations. (Of course there are other wikimedians who also share my
passion. I greatly appreciate your work!)

My inspiration for continuing to do volunteer work for the wikimedia
movement has largely come from the people inside the parent WMF and the WMF
Board. Despite the constant criticism from "the community", I find the
folks employed at the WMF to be hard core believers in the Wikimedia
movement and share my value of increasing the diversity of the community
and content, and working to eliminate systemic bias in content.

So it is not surprising to me that there is disconnect between "the
community" and the WMF staff and Board around supporting current volunteers
and recruiting a more diverse community.

I appreciate the WMF grant team for doing this type of experimentation, and
encourage other WMF affiliated organizations (chapters, thematic
organization, and user groups) to not be timid in addressing all types of
diversity and systemic bias by narrowing their focus in order to get the
best results.

I sincerely apologize if some people reading my comment feel under
appreciated and become dispirited. But creating a diverse wikimedia
movement  in order to eliminate entrenched systemic bias is a stronger
value for me. I hope that hearing from someone like myself who is inspired
by the experiment will change the minds of some people.

But even if that doesn't happen it is important to me to speak out in
support of the Inspire Gender Gap campaign and the staff & volunteers who
share my vision of collecting and disseminating free content to everyone in
the world.

Warm regards to all people everywhere in the wikimedia movement!

Sydney

Sydney Poore
User:FloNight
Wikipedian in Residence
at Cochrane Collaboration

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 5:26 AM, Romaine Wiki <[hidden email]> 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>
_______________________________________________
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

Gregory Varnum-2
When I first heard about the idea - I was timid and concerned. However,
after reading the responses - I am not sure that everyone is looking at
this the right way. My concerns have been addressed, largely by the
commitment to accept time-sensitive requests and the description of the
idea.

It has become increasingly common for grant organizations to encourage
applicants to focus their programs on target areas - sometimes that
requirement applies to the enter year. However, that generally does not
mean you cannot submit your usual programs and ideas - it just challenges
you to expand them in a particular focus area. Given the focus on gender
gap work in the tech sector, starting with that during a trial run seems
logical.

It seems to me that this would be a good excuse for events like WLM, Wiki
Loves Pride, Wikimedia Conference, and others possibly planning during
those months to consider how to increase the focus on the gender gap.
Promoting themes that encourage articles about women (we already know there
are huge gaps in a lot of professions), Pride could give prizes to great
articles about lesbian pioneers, or WLM could promote photos of female
inspired or involved architectural projects. With the possible exception of
things like specific tech development projects, I think most outreach
projects could be challenged to find a way to include addressing the gender
gap into their plans for work that would be funded during those months.

I'm not sure that this threatens gender gap projects after that period, or
threatens projects that are not traditionally seen as gender gap focused.
If it does, then we will know it didn't work. But I would encourage folks
to think of this as a challenge on how they can help include addressing
gender gap in their programming rather than viewing it as an obstacle to
funding.

Plus, it sounds like the underlying message remains what it always is - if
you have an idea and are concerned about the timelines - contact the
grantmaking staff or volunteers to talk it through.

-greg aka varnent

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Values. It is a matter of values.
>
> If you believe, as I do, that lack of diversity of Wikimedia projects is
> seriously compromising the content of the projects then designing a
> campaign that addresses one or more aspects of this concern is a reasonable
> top priority even if it displaces other interests/values.
>
> It has become pretty obvious that funding the interests/values of existing
> community members through regular channels is not creating content free of
> systemic bias in general nor closing the human gender gap. (I say this as
> someone who has read all types of WMF funding proposals and evaluations of
> for several years now.)
>
> Temporarily doing a 3 month targeted Gender Gap experimental campaign is a
> modest approach to take in addressing one of the biggest weaknesses of
> Wikimedia Foundation projects. The reaction of some members of the
> community was predictable, because it is evident in the majority of
> previous and current funding requests that increasing the diversity of the
> larger Wikimedia movement is secondary priority of most existing people and
> organizations. (Of course there are other wikimedians who also share my
> passion. I greatly appreciate your work!)
>
> My inspiration for continuing to do volunteer work for the wikimedia
> movement has largely come from the people inside the parent WMF and the WMF
> Board. Despite the constant criticism from "the community", I find the
> folks employed at the WMF to be hard core believers in the Wikimedia
> movement and share my value of increasing the diversity of the community
> and content, and working to eliminate systemic bias in content.
>
> So it is not surprising to me that there is disconnect between "the
> community" and the WMF staff and Board around supporting current volunteers
> and recruiting a more diverse community.
>
> I appreciate the WMF grant team for doing this type of experimentation, and
> encourage other WMF affiliated organizations (chapters, thematic
> organization, and user groups) to not be timid in addressing all types of
> diversity and systemic bias by narrowing their focus in order to get the
> best results.
>
> I sincerely apologize if some people reading my comment feel under
> appreciated and become dispirited. But creating a diverse wikimedia
> movement  in order to eliminate entrenched systemic bias is a stronger
> value for me. I hope that hearing from someone like myself who is inspired
> by the experiment will change the minds of some people.
>
> But even if that doesn't happen it is important to me to speak out in
> support of the Inspire Gender Gap campaign and the staff & volunteers who
> share my vision of collecting and disseminating free content to everyone in
> the world.
>
> Warm regards to all people everywhere in the wikimedia movement!
>
> Sydney
>
> Sydney Poore
> User:FloNight
> Wikipedian in Residence
> at Cochrane Collaboration
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 5:26 AM, Romaine Wiki <[hidden email]>
> 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>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Bjoern Hoehrmann
In reply to this post by Sydney Poore
* Sydney Poore wrote:

>It has become pretty obvious that funding the interests/values of existing
>community members through regular channels is not creating content free of
>systemic bias in general nor closing the human gender gap. (I say this as
>someone who has read all types of WMF funding proposals and evaluations of
>for several years now.)
>
>Temporarily doing a 3 month targeted Gender Gap experimental campaign is a
>modest approach to take in addressing one of the biggest weaknesses of
>Wikimedia Foundation projects. The reaction of some members of the
>community was predictable, because it is evident in the majority of
>previous and current funding requests that increasing the diversity of the
>larger Wikimedia movement is secondary priority of most existing people and
>organizations.

Proposed projects with a good chance to measurably "shrink" the "gender
gap" are not being denied adequate funding as far as I can tell. Without
actual resource shortages concerning the "gender gap" topic with respect
to "grants", be that money or staff time for proposal reviews, what we
have here is a solution looking for a problem. We would have a different
kind of discussion if we were talking about "there is a huge backlog of
great gender gap projects in need of funding", but you don't say that it
is evident in the *rejection* of requests, you say that's evident in the
requests themself. Earlier Siko Bouterse wrote the same, "these kinds of
projects haven’t emerged organically at any meaningful scale".
--
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

Sydney Poore
It appears to me that you are entirely missing the actual nature of the
problem and the reason for having a campaign targeted at the gender gap.

The *problem* is that there have been a suboptimal number of grant requests
for funds to address the gender gap even though it a listed priority of the
WMF.

The purpose of the campaign is to invite requests for funding, have extra
support available if people need mentoring or assistance of other kinds. To
do this campaign well, the WMF staff needs to refocus the time of people
toward this endeavor.

A wonderful response from people reading about this campaign would be to
ask: what can I do to help bring in high quality grant requests?

Those of you who are familiar with making grant requests or using the
IdeaLab, offer to help people who are newer to the process.

Those of you who are developers and see a way to improve an idea with
technology, step in and make suggestion.

Over the past 3-4 years all around the world people have holding
conferences and discussing the gender gap. Now is the time to expand on the
work that has been done in these conference. Help spread the word. Assist
with translations to help some who is less comfortable writing in English
bring there ideas to meta.

The point of this targeted campaign is far more than reserving a specific
amount of dollars for the gender gap issue.

The biggest obstacle to success will be the lack of human resources to
refine and execute the projects.

Therefore is the reason that people and organizations are being asked to
set aside other projects in order to help address this vital area of
concern.

I hope everyone reading this email will do at least one small thing to help.

Warm regards,

Sydney
On Jan 8, 2015 11:04 PM, "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> * Sydney Poore wrote:
> >It has become pretty obvious that funding the interests/values of existing
> >community members through regular channels is not creating content free of
> >systemic bias in general nor closing the human gender gap. (I say this as
> >someone who has read all types of WMF funding proposals and evaluations of
> >for several years now.)
> >
> >Temporarily doing a 3 month targeted Gender Gap experimental campaign is a
> >modest approach to take in addressing one of the biggest weaknesses of
> >Wikimedia Foundation projects. The reaction of some members of the
> >community was predictable, because it is evident in the majority of
> >previous and current funding requests that increasing the diversity of the
> >larger Wikimedia movement is secondary priority of most existing people
> and
> >organizations.
>
> Proposed projects with a good chance to measurably "shrink" the "gender
> gap" are not being denied adequate funding as far as I can tell. Without
> actual resource shortages concerning the "gender gap" topic with respect
> to "grants", be that money or staff time for proposal reviews, what we
> have here is a solution looking for a problem. We would have a different
> kind of discussion if we were talking about "there is a huge backlog of
> great gender gap projects in need of funding", but you don't say that it
> is evident in the *rejection* of requests, you say that's evident in the
> requests themself. Earlier Siko Bouterse wrote the same, "these kinds of
> projects haven’t emerged organically at any meaningful scale".
> --
> 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>
_______________________________________________
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

Fæ
Hi Sydney,

I understand your perspective, but I also understand the "where is the
carrot?" question. I would actively support the campaign if it had
been run as one of stating that for X weeks or months that the WMF
grants system would give priority to gendergap related proposals and
that we would have other themes during the year. This is effectively
what has been said is happening, it just has been expressed as a ban
against non-gendergap proposals.

Folks would understand if their proposal then got responses such as
"thank you, with the priority on gendergap we have scheduled your
excellent WLM/Belgium/LGBT Pride proposal for a review in 2 months
time".

As a founder of a user group and once a trustee of a chapter, I would
be concerned if this same method was applied to my most loved project
areas for a month or two, unless the volunteer group were notified
well in advance so that we could work with the grants team with our
network of contacts and communication channels to ensure a healthy mix
of proposals in time for the limited window available. A community
changing and high impact proposal might take up to a year to assemble
a team of volunteers and have a strong enough vision to put a detailed
proposal together. A month or even 3 months notice puts a huge amount
of stress on the handful of unpaid volunteers prepared to put in the
hard work that these proposals take, not because the system is overly
bureaucratic, but because we are so worried about doing the right
thing, doing it well and keepinhg our network of volunteers on-board
with plans and ready to use the grant to maximum effect when it
arrives. Sadly "burn-out" remains a major issue for our most active
volunteers and we should take care to set up our systems to be
flexible and low stress.

I hope the experiment is successful and there are some interesting
gendergap proposals that have significant measurable outcomes on our
projects, in terms of active users and content creation. At the same
time I hope that folks responsible for the grants process will adapt
and improve to find a more harmonious positive approach to
prioritization; i.e. lots of easy to understand carrots which are not
too tricky to reach for.

Fae

On 9 January 2015 at 15:34, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It appears to me that you are entirely missing the actual nature of the
> problem and the reason for having a campaign targeted at the gender gap.
>
> The *problem* is that there have been a suboptimal number of grant requests
> for funds to address the gender gap even though it a listed priority of the
> WMF.
>
> The purpose of the campaign is to invite requests for funding, have extra
> support available if people need mentoring or assistance of other kinds. To
> do this campaign well, the WMF staff needs to refocus the time of people
> toward this endeavor.
>
> A wonderful response from people reading about this campaign would be to
> ask: what can I do to help bring in high quality grant requests?
>
> Those of you who are familiar with making grant requests or using the
> IdeaLab, offer to help people who are newer to the process.
>
> Those of you who are developers and see a way to improve an idea with
> technology, step in and make suggestion.
>
> Over the past 3-4 years all around the world people have holding
> conferences and discussing the gender gap. Now is the time to expand on the
> work that has been done in these conference. Help spread the word. Assist
> with translations to help some who is less comfortable writing in English
> bring there ideas to meta.
>
> The point of this targeted campaign is far more than reserving a specific
> amount of dollars for the gender gap issue.
>
> The biggest obstacle to success will be the lack of human resources to
> refine and execute the projects.
>
> Therefore is the reason that people and organizations are being asked to
> set aside other projects in order to help address this vital area of
> concern.
>
> I hope everyone reading this email will do at least one small thing to help.
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Sydney
> On Jan 8, 2015 11:04 PM, "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <[hidden email]> wrote:

--
[hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

_______________________________________________
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