Talk:Meetup/London/60

Apologies

1. I may be in Leeds rather than London (I currently live there and only come in to London to work during the week) Bavage (talk) 11:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
2. Can't come as I will be helping run the bioblitz at Queen Elizabeth Country Park, an event with experts and the public with the aim of recording as many species on-site as possible in 24 hours. On the upside, this and presence there in general provides a good opportunity to collect photos for Commons. CT Cooper · talk 20:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
3. Gordo (talk)

Venue

In my experience, a change of venue has to be thought through carefully. This is London Wikimeet 60, and the Penderels Oak has been the home for the wikimeet for some years. Does the wifi really amount to much? Are not those of us with mobile devices have 3G? Gordo (talk) 19:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

The WiFi has nearly always been fine for me - my laptop just seems to be good at getting a connection, although some people clearly do struggle. I won't make either this or the following meetup, but I'm open minded about trying a new place. I think we should stick to the tried and tested pub or pub like venue for now - a cafe would be too small and too fast paced to be suitable, and Wikimedida UK headquarters too boring. I don't know much about pubs in London, so I can't offer any suggestions on an a new one. As someone who lives in Hampshire, I live in or live beyond the home counties depending on the definition used, but in any case, I think any meetups outside London should supplement, not replace, the central London one. For example, there has been a spoken proposal for a meetup in Southampton, depending on demand. CT Cooper · talk 21:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Re Gordo: Well, it's a bit daft for a group congregating in the interests of an internet-based project are doing so where the WiFi is poor to nonexistent. Many of us have 3G phones, but that obviously doesn't compare to editing from a laptop.

I agree with Chris' thoughts on the nature of cafes and WMUK headquarters - aside from the shoddy WiFi, the Penderel's Oak ticks every box. The obvious thing to do is to be in a different place in the pub, and since the router is behind the bar, the raised platform area on the left as if one was walking to the bar from the entrance might be a better place to congregate, and is far from tucked away (in 2008 I remember being sitting in the family section at the very back of the pub). As for "home counties" comment, not being funny but I would take that with a pinch of salt: I myself live in the arse-end of nowhere two counties away from the Greater London area, and several people travel even further afield from the Midlands. WilliamH (talk) 21:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, moving to the back may work. Not only would be the WiFi be better but it is away from the front door which the staff insist on being kept open regardless of the noise/weather conditions, and would also mean we won't have to be move if under 18s take part (apparently there only allowed at the back of the pub, and there was a meetup along time ago in which we were forced to move for this reason). CT Cooper · talk 22:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't clear, I meant that the very back of the pub wouldn't be a great place to be, as I'm sure people would miss us. The raised platform on the left would be nearer the router, tucked away from the street noise by being around from the door, and isn't too far away in that people would miss us. WilliamH (talk) 22:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, people missing us is a problem - given Meetup/London/59, although if we agreed a move with a clear note on the meetup page, it might partially resolve this issue. I remember having one meetup on the left platform, after one time the pub booked out our normal table(s) to a "private party" - I can't remember if the WiFi was better or not, although it was nice to be a bit further away from the door, even if it was a bit of a squeeze on a high turnout (the same problem may well as apply for the back). CT Cooper · talk 22:41, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

How many people turned up? And how many did so in comparison to how many actually signed up? I'm thinking that quite a few turn up without doing so these days. WilliamH (talk) 23:34, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I would guess if you see ten on the page, then ten turn up across the afternoon. So, some don't sign up but do turn up, and vice versa. Gordo (talk) 09:44, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

It's difficult to say , I think the meetup I was talking about may be Meetup/London/54, which if that was the case the fifteen sign-ups did roughly reflect the level of attendance, although I have taken note of people not signing-up and turning up and vice versa. CT Cooper · talk 18:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Increase frequency?

As someone who lives a long way from London, it only takes the slightest hiccup for me to miss a meetup and as a result I frequently miss a few in a row when they happen to fall on weekends in which I'm not available. We have a good attendance rate so perhaps its time to trial an increase of meetups to two a month, such as by adding another one on the fourth Sunday of every month. Nobody is obliged to make both within a month - I know I won't, but it would increase flexibility for everyone. CT Cooper · talk 21:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Two a month? I agree with that, and I would find the flexibility of 2nd or 4th Sunday a bonus... Gordo (talk) 08:01, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't see why that can't be trialled. I live a long way from London too though, and as much as I enjoy going, it's not the end of the world if I can't get there. I guess what's really going to make or break it is whether or not London Wikimedians fancy turning up every fortnight. If the same number of people were simply spread out over two different meetings, then that would be a shame, as for me, the more people there is to meet, the greater incentive there is to go. WilliamH (talk) 09:19, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

OK. Set it up! Gordo (talk) 09:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• 12th, 26th August
• 9th, 23rd September
• 14th, 28th October

Note that 27th/28th October is "Train the Trainers" Gordo (talk) 09:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I will happily set it up when I have a spare moment, if there is agreement in favour. As WilliamH alludes to, it is not without risk - there is a danger of attendance becoming too spread out reducing the incentive of some to come. I'm on holiday for both the 26th and the 9th meetups, so I won't witnessing the results in person until September if it starts this month. CT Cooper · talk 19:02, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

If we're going to have two a month, can we try and make them different in some way? Perhaps one in a pub and one at the WMUK office? The former would probably stay much as it is now, with people having food and drink and enjoyable conversation, while the latter would probably end up focusing more on communal editing (due to the absence of beer and the presence of decent WiFi). --Tango (talk) 20:00, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

If that is preferred, then it may work for some - although I won't be a regular at the WMUK office one, as I wouldn't see it as justifying the cost. CT Cooper · talk 21:09, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Part of the point is that it would attract different people. Some people may not be interested in having a few drinks in a pub, but would like to sit in a large meeting room with coffee and laptops. Others, like you, wouldn't be interested in that, but are interested in having a few drinks in a pub. Still others would like both. --Tango (talk) 21:50, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I understand that, although that is a distinct proposal from my one to increase flexibility for the audience we do have. For the record, the drinks available is not the issue - I have never drunk alcohol at a Wikimedia meetup, only tea and orange juice - not for any particular reason, I just don't like beer and I prefer drinking the stuff I do like, such as wine, in the evenings. Other people may be different, but I have never got a lot of editing done at meetups - if there is any real talking, its too distracting - if there isn't any, its too boring and I would be doing things I could do anywhere. For the person-to-person collaboration benefit to be worth the cost of transport, as I see it, there would need to be some kind of plan on the topic areas to be "edited". CT Cooper · talk 22:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Pubs and cafes and community centres.

On the choice of venue, it is clear that Penderel's Oak has one big bonus. We can hang around all day (for at least five hours), have a few drinks, eat something, and not get moved on. Wetherspoons have rules for families - one meal for all, and then one drink, and then you leave [1]. The wifi is an issue, for sure, and I agree it is a good thing to have access. But this is a meetup, and the reason for that is to meet face to face. In my experience (and I get to about one in four) a lot of discussion is about issues that surpass the need for access to the Internet. On the other hand, I recall the amount of frustration from many people who want to get online. I will write to Wetherspoons. As for alternatives, it would be hard to find a place in Central London that would host us for a whole afternoon, free of charge. Apart from pubs, places such as Conway Hall and Friends Meeting House in Euston come to mind, is you have a few hundred quid to spare. So, I think we should keep in mind that Wetherspoons have been giving us an "in kind" benefit for some time, and in return we buy a few drinks. The only other place where we could meet for free is WMUK HQ (Development House, London, EC2), and as somebody said, that lacks interest. Gordo (talk) 08:17, 11 August 2012 (UTC)