Grants talk:PEG/WM IT/Wikimedia Conference 2013

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Amounts[edit]

Dear, thank you for your grant application. Given that this is a "traditional" meeting I don't see the problem with his. However, I have some questions about budget.

  • You asked for 25 scholarships for travel. Is that enough? Did you asked WM DE how much requests they had?
  • Lodging expenses 50€/night. Have you already decided where participants will be accommodated? If yes, is this price with group discounts or it is regular.
  • Conference venue + catering is about 59.000. I'm interesting to know how much is for venue and how much for cataring?
  • facilitators, visual documentation and staff cost more than 25.000. How much staff you (will) have, and how much money each of facilitators will get.

Thanks in advance.--MikyM (talk) 14:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Linking to Wikimedia Conference 2013, and congrats for the millionth article on it.wp! Bennylin 14:46, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi MikiM,

  1. Yes, we asked WMDE and they sent us the list of the chapters supported last year
  2. We have already blocked 100 beds at the hostel with a group discount price and we are looking for cheap (but nice) accommodation
  3. We hired a project manager and we estimated 10000 euros for 2 facilitators
--Gsepe (WMI) (talk) 18:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Regarding venue + catering, we can't divide the two costs since it's an all inclusive offer: 70€+taxes per person per day for venue, lunch and coffee station.

--Frieda (talk) 20:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Last year, WMDE supported 2 representatives from 24 chapters with travel costs, ~38.000 Euros in total. I'd be happy to provide more budget data, if needed. --Nicole Ebber (WMDE) (talk) 10:29, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Same for WMPL - we supported 2 representatives from several CEE countries. For 2013 we have also some funds allocated for that purpose (Exaclty 20000 PLN which is around 5000 EUR). See: Wikimedia_Polska/Plans_for_2013#International_support Polimerek (talk) 12:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Proceedings[edit]

Ni! Ciao, =D

I think this move from Germany to Italy should be seen as a good opportunity to develop a more inclusive dynamics for collaboration during the event. The following questions are not comprehensive, but try to address this opportunity.

  • How are you going to use the conference to raise awareness of the international general contributor population to the organizational side of the movement?
We are planning to ask our volounteers to compile Etherpad minutes, which will be published on Meta. When the Conference will be confirmed, i.e. when the grant will be accepted, we will post a message in various Village pumps and try to inform as much as we can the community about the event, Wikimedia Foundation could be a good help in allowing us to use its message delivery system.
As Nemo anticipated, we are in the process of creating a Program Committee composed by volunteers, so we will give more informatiomn about this soon.
We'll encourage participants to blog and tweet about the Conference and topics discussed.
Wikipedia Signpost and the WMF Blog would be contacted for covering the event.
On a related note, we inserted Twitter account on the registration module and we are planning to list all participants Twitter account, in order to make a public list of possible live twitters. Last year there was a huge amount of live twitting that would be nice to replicate. --Aubrey (talk) 15:25, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
  • What is the plan to improve online participation in the meeting? For example, will there be real time broadcasting of discussions and publishing of documentation during the event?
  • What is the plan to improve the chapter's presentations during the event, so they resemble less a salesperson's speech and become a more honest sharing of experiences among peers with enough time, and thus information flow, to allow for constructive criticism?
  • What are the criteria for scholarship? For example, what about demanding the publication of an informative chapter/community report, previous to the event, in order to receive a scholarship or, for larger chapters, even to participate in the event?
  • What measures will you take to make sure the discussion topics are not driven by an agenda set by programs and issues of numerically and financially stronger chapters? In other words, what will the event dynamics be? You mention paid facilitators, what facilitation methodology will they apply?
  • You say that "a successful Conference would help and smooth collaboration, communication and coordination between Chapters, Thematic organisations, User groups, Board and WMF staff". Are thematic organizations and user groups going to be welcome to the conference?[Redacted after noticing they are already listed as participants] Are there scholarships allocated to these groups?
  • There are two kinds of issues discussed during WMCon: collaboration in programs and competition for resources. How much of the time will be dedicated to discuss competition for resources, such as chapter financing and trademark issues? How transparent will those discussions be? Historically it's been an ugly business, but with the creation of the FDC I'd expect this to be moved to other spaces and not waste so much time of WMCon.

All these have been issues of the conference, they are complex, but this coming through the GAC seems like a nice chance to clear them up a little bit.

Felicità, e ringrazio moltissimo per ospitare questo evento!

--Solstag (talk) 01:00, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

You're asking many questions and I suppose Frieda or Giulia will answer/correct me; let me anticipate some points with the information I have as chapter member.
  • Broadcasting, as in audio/video, is clearly not provided because it's not included in the budget. As for documentation, I don't understand if you want it to be real-time as well, but it's mentioned in the request (see visual documentation, volunteers, wi-fi).
  • Most of your questions are about the program. I'm not sure I agree with your statements of problems, anyway the plan is to leave the program to a volunteers committee (a very agile one, I assume).
  • As for reports, WMIT has a track of quite strict reporting requirements for scholarships and reimbursements: since the beginning of time any event participation (reimbursed or not) is followed by a report to the chapter members; Wikimania scholarships have always had as requirements a full and active participation to the event, (collaboration to) a written report and in-person report to the assembly. However, I'm not sure how such a requirement may be enforced in this case, considering that 1) the organisers don't speak the languages of all chapters (and of course you don't want to impose English imperialism even in reports from participants), 2) the participants are selected by the respective organisations. --Nemo 22:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Some more info:

  • broadcasting: nop. In our experience (WMI tries to broadcast its general meeting twice a year, sometimes it happens but in other occasion its impossible due to the venue) online participation to a RL meeting is almost impossible, because you can follow the discussion, but you can't participate.. even if we open an IRC channel for comments interaction is really difficult. We'll use public etherpads for minutes and we planned to have visual documentation.
  • improving the chapter's presentations: obviously that's your personal opinion :-) I loved every year I participated in past WMConf the "State of the chapters" session since it gave me a quick slide on every chapter activity. Constructive sharing and criticism needs a smaller group to be effective, that's why there'll be parallel sessions on different topics regarding chapters experiences.
  • stronger chapters: I never considered WMI as a stronger chapter and I think that having WMI hosting such an event is the best guarantee you can have :-)

Facilitators are used to Open-space technology, but we're still discussing with them

  • scholarship for groups: scholarships are available for *participants* to the conference.
  • FDC & trademarks: Upon request. I'll personally suggest to have at least a session on financing without FDC, but we'll check for feedback before including it.
--Frieda (talk) 07:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

WMDE contribution[edit]

Since it changes the amount request by much, when we will know if WMDE will support the conference with the 50K € or not? Béria Lima msg 02:38, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm wondering if WMDE already allocated budget for hosting the conference in Berlin in their FDC 2013 budget request, they should automatically need to be transfer to WMIT --Itzike (talk) 17:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
We have allocated a budget of up to 50.000 Euro for the conference and I have just confirmed our support in an email to Frieda and Asaf. --Nicole Ebber (WMDE) (talk) 10:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Scholarships[edit]

Would the 2013 Wikimedia Conference provide two scholarships (as practiced) for every chapter, which do not have financial ability to send representatives at its own expense? -- Namayan (talk) 04:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

It depends on how many requests we'll receive. As specified in the budget we allocated money for 25 scholarship which probably will result in one representative for chapter.
--Frieda (talk) 18:42, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Number of participants[edit]

you mention about 250 participants. I hardly understand how we came to this number. 2 reps from each chapter (X40 = 80), about 10 chapters have also CEO\ED raise this number to 90. Board of trustee, WMF staff, WMIT staff, AffiCom is about how much? 50 participants? Could you give detailed information how you got this number as it affecting dramatically about the cost of the event.. --Itzike (talk) 17:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Itzike,

  • 40 WMF
  • 80 chapters
  • 20 WMI and chapters staff
  • 20 from other organization (affiliates, "not yet incorporated" chapters, ecc.)
  • 10+ volunteers
  • xx WCA, WLM, AffCom

sum is about 200 persons. Some uncertainty.. and we fixed it to 250, since we've obtained a "per person per day" deal and not a "closed" offer for 250 persons for 4 days.

--Frieda (talk) 18:50, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
40 WMF? there are 8 board members, and last year we had about 10-15 staff from WMF. Did WMF confirm they going to double their delegation? I will see this step of waste of money and increasing the number of the participates dramatically and from my POV this is not welcome.
As far as I know, as someone who participate in every phone meeting of the WCA, and as the one who demand WCA will not have different delegation to the conf, I don't know about any WCA extra representative. I really don't know since when WLM had joined this meeting, and when it been decided. I'm don't want to open this subject here, but I don't sure WLM attendees will have what to talk for 3 days, and I personally don't want to see extra representative from some chapters in the chapters meeting. We trying to keep this meeting small, not expensive and equal between all the chapters - 2\3 people, max.
Back to the issue, the number of participants should not need to more than about 150 people. if we jumping so high, we need to talk about it separately --Itzike (talk) 19:07, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't really expect to see 250 people; think of it as a maximum. The conference will be ready for up to 250 people, but they may be less. I expect something a bit under 200. Note that:
  • as Frieda said, the price is not fixed, but per person per day, thus if there will be less people, no money is wasted;
  • in this numbers not only conference participants are considered, but also some support (i.e. the 10+ volunteers).
  • WLM: the Thursday is dedicated to thematic meetings, for anyone is interested in it. One of the interested groups is WLM.
  • as for the WCA, we it's agreed that council members have to be part of the usual 2+1 delegates. However, there may be extra people. In particular, if we will hire the secretary-general before the Wikimedia Conference, he should participate. In any case, this will not be a number much greater than 0 :-) - Laurentius (talk) 20:37, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Last first - I think we can handle one more participate, and even 2-3 :) I meant there will not be lot of people under this title to worth mention that. I don't want it to look like the WCA will extra represent others than the two representative.
Regarding WLM - I will send email about it to their mailing list. What, they will come only to attend on Thursday? seem unreasonable. We need to remember and I'm asking WMIT as the organizer - This is not Wikimania, and the attend list should be small as possible. More than it donors money, the idea behind this meeting is to have talks between chapters-wmf, and now also between affiliates. But the question of having this meeting also place for special workings groups (beside people who already attending - of course there is no problem to have WLM meeting between the chapters representatives) should be discussed.
I understand that you paying only per person - but there is huge different between 150 and 250 people. First of all, it's about 20,000 euro extra, and there is different aspects affected (numbers of rooms, their sizes, costs for Wi-Fi, costs for the party and ext'..). --Itzike (talk) 20:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
The main difference is in the size of the main room used for the meeting's plenary; I don't know what's the impact of 250 vs. 150 in the choice.
As for additional meetings attached to the chapters meeting: they should in general be seen as a way to save (travel) money, not to spend more. I think Frieda's answer at #Scholarships implies that scholarships will be given to chapters representatives first (maybe thematical orgs included, or next), I doubt there would be some left for people attending WLM only if any: I suppose it would be enough to make this explicit in the request? --Nemo 22:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
No, the question is not only the amount of money for scholarships, but also the equality. There are chapters who can send their 2 representative, CEO, and WLM representative. Many of them not. And the question if WLM gonna have 3d full time side conference, or we will have chapters with more than 2-3 representative in the room and the session - what we really don't want, again, as part of the idea to save the equality between either big chapters and small chapters. --Itzike (talk) 15:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't know why you're assuming that WLM participants will be from "big chapters", but I'd think they'll often/mostly be the same persons attending the chapters meeting, which would reduce the presence of big chapters in it. Anyway, it doesn't seem hard to enforce the rule that chapter can have 2 representatives at most in the chapters meeting (plus CEO?) and that any other member in excess will not be a chapters meeting attendee: seems rather obvious to me, just like documenters or help desk people from WMDE were not additional representatives of WMDE... --Nemo 19:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
The WMF delegation, including board members, will not exceed 30 people, all told. It's still going to be larger than last year, mostly because the event is collocated with a meeting of the FDC, which requires additional staff support from WMF. Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 20:57, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Of course, we increasing the number every year, but there is huge different between 113 last year to 250 :). The FDC members are includes in the WMF delegation counting? --Itzike (talk) 21:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
No, they are not. Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 21:14, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
So it mean 8 more. BTW, last year we had about 12 staff members (+8 board), including staff from legal, HR and finance. I understand the yearly usual increase, and the need for FDC staff to attend, but I advise WMF also to try minimize their delegation also if they can. --Itzike (talk) 21:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

WMF wrote to Giulia that they will send 40 persons and Giulia is already looking for their rooms.
About WLM, it is a shared experienced between so many chapters that is disadvantageous forgetting it.. and Wikimania is too late to discuss WLM 2013.

--Frieda (talk) 07:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

As Frieda said, WMF wrote to me that they would have sent around 40 people. 2 days ago they told me that the headcount is looking like there will be around 30 people.

--Gsepe (WMI) (talk) 08:40, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I think even 30 is still too many. Can they break it down? It's like sending part of the office all the way around the world using donor's money. Even each chapter is only 2 and can not exceed. It won't be a very effective meeting if there is going to be too many participants. Siska.Doviana (talk) 03:52, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Wi-fi[edit]

From my past experience, 8.494,20 seem like very expensive cost. As this is exact number, I believe you already have quote for this service. Could you give more information about this cost and if others contractors had been checked?--Itzike (talk) 17:20, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

We've many different offers (as far as I remembered, but Giulia can confirm) from 3k up to 6k for similar products (a home ADSL sold as a business line). This offer is the only reliable one we gained.
Frieda (talk) 18:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I would be happy if this issue can be double checked. We paid about this amount for one week service for up to 1200 devices, on 3 different buildings, including media and press rooms on Wikimania. This conference is much more smaller, and the prices of this kind of services had been decrease since 2011. --Itzike (talk) 19:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

But you never bought such a service in Italy.. --Frieda (talk) 07:39, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Cost of staffers + facilitators[edit]

Could WMDE give more information about their costs last year to the facilitators? It seem high. who are the staffer needed and how many? are you referring to the staff who been mention under the Team members section?--Itzike (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

The only expected staff is what listed in the final section, yes, and the "normal" WMIT staff is not included in the costs but only considered as indirect financial contribution (note 2). (Again, only relaying the discussions among WMIT members, the board will correct me if I'm wrong.) --Nemo 22:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
We spent ~5000 Euro (tax included) on the two facilitators (one of them did both, facilitation and the visual documentation). --Nicole Ebber (WMDE) (talk) 13:55, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Re-arrangement of budget[edit]

After the donation of WM DE it remains 80.000 Euros to be financed, is not it? --Ilario (talk) 16:25, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

If WM DE will confirm a contribution of 50 k€, then it will remain 80 k€ to be financed. But, as far as I know, they haven't decided yet. - Laurentius (talk) 10:54, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
The question is that the decision cannot proceed in my opinion if WM DE doesn't confirm its donation. If the grant is requesting 131.000 Euros or 80.000 Euros, it's important. In any grant the amount should be well defined. In my opinion this amount should have been already included in the "Non-financial requirements" probably with prior negotiations with WM DE, so I am a little bit concerned that this negotiation is happening now, after the request of the grant, and the grant committee should make comments "on the principles" and not on a clear budget. --Ilario (talk) 22:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
a parte
Are you using the present tense by mistake or on purpose? I was very confused by your comment, even after quadruple-checking. I don't know if you're aware of news not shared here, but the text of the request is very clear: «Grant request 131.394,20». --Nemo 10:42, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Second point: is Nemo making comments "officially" as member of the team? The answer of Nemo means that you are looking for 131.000 euros and in case of donation of WM DE the budget will be 181.000 euros. I don't have any information, I expect that you give us this information in order to close the grant as soon as possible, and I am using the present tense to ask you: "Where are you in the negotiation with WM DE?". Thank you Laurentius for you clarification. May I ask to include in the section "Non-financial requirements" an additional point about that? --Ilario (talk) 22:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't know why you read into my words things that are not written: I never said anything that could mean «you are looking for 131.000 euros and in case of donation of WM DE the budget will be 181.000 euros». Please stick to the text. Anyway, I'm removing my comment as it's redundant to Laurentius' and the answer to your question about me is above ("no"). --Nemo 04:25, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Do we proceed?[edit]

Sorry for my question. I don't understand if we have to vote or if there are some open questions about this grant. Personally I have any. Are there anyone waiting clarifications? --Ilario (talk) 00:41, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

As you can see on the talk page and also on Chapters-L there is issue about the number of participants. I think the chapters say their words on that, and WMI need to change their plan and budget according to that. Beside that, I still afraid there are some expensive costs (Wi-fi, Facilitators - which are cost double from 2012) that we need to find way to reduce them.. --Itzike (talk) 14:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Itzike I don't see so much consensus on chapter-l on your proposal. And cost reduction, as I stated many times, is possible only not having such a conference in Milan.

Frieda (talk) 07:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

A few questions from the new form[edit]

Hello, all: I noticed that WMIT used an older version of the grant submission form rather than the form that is created according to the instructions here: Grants:Index/Submit request. Perhaps this is becuase a draft of this request was started elsewhere before it was submitted here on Meta.

There's not a need to reformat this request since the GAC has already been reviewing it, but it would be really helpful if you could briefly address the following questions (from the new form).

  • If your project will benefit a specific online community, please list that here. For example, English Wiktionary.
  • Provide a brief statement (about 1 paragraph) about how your project is related to other work in the Wikimedia movement. Does your project fit into a work area such as GLAM, Education, Organization Development, Editor Retention, or Outreach?
  • If successful, does your project have the potential to be replicated successfully by other individuals, groups, or organizations? Please explain how in 1 - 2 sentences.
  • Does your organization currently employ any fulltime or part-time staff or contractors?
  • If you answered YES, please indicate how many. You may use fractions or percentages for part-time staff if appropriate.
  • If yes, please provide a list of their job functions, or a link to your organization's staff page, if it lists all employees and contractors employed or engaged by your organization.

Also, regarding your measures of success, do you have a link to the survey you are developing? What types of questions will you be asking participants in order to determine whether the conference was successful?

Thank you, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:07, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Winifred,
I try to answer to all the questions:

  1. If your project will benefit a specific online community, please list that here.
    since it's an international and cross-community event, none directly, meta users as the best approximation.
  2. Provide a brief statement (about 1 paragraph) about how your project is related to other work in the Wikimedia movement. Does your project fit into a work area such as GLAM, Education, Organization Development, Editor Retention, or Outreach?
    It fits in most areas:
    GLAM: it will host a couple of sessions on WLM, and during project sharing session we'll expect to have many GLAM projects
    Education: Wikipedia Education Program meeting will take place at WMConf2013
    Organization Development: yes, in many ways. New constituted affiliates may benefit from other groups experience, and session about professionalization will take place
    Outreach: many affiliates are running outreach programs and they'll be shared during the conference
  3. If successful, does your project have the potential to be replicated successfully by other individuals, groups, or organizations?
    Sure, it's already a replica. Wikimedia Deutschland shared a guide to the organisation of such an event and is available with tons of great suggestion. We plan to improve this guide and be available next year to support the new organizer.
  4. Does your organization currently employ any fulltime or part-time staff or contractors?
    Yes:
    Francesca Lissoni (1 FTE), Office manager and secretariat
    Alessandro Polvani (1 FTE), junior fundraiser
    Giulia Sepe (fixed-term contractor), WMConf2013 organizer
    Emma Tracanella (contractor, about 80% FTE), Wiki Loves Monuments Italia director
    Luciano Zanin (contractor, about 15% FTE), senior fundraiser
    Lorenza De Carolis (contractor, about 30% FTE), sponsorship

I'll add the link to the survey we're developing asap, we need to publish it somewhere.

--Frieda (talk) 07:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

3BRBS Comment[edit]

I recuse myself from participating on the discussion, since I'm probably attending to the meeting.--3BRBS (talk) 13:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC)