Talk:Looking at the next five years – a day workshop on the future of Wikimedia UK

From Wikimedia UK
Jump to: navigation, search

Diary clash[edit | edit source]

This event is currently scheduled for 23rd of March, as is Manchester meetup 17. Obviously we can't guarantee to avoid all clashes, but I thought it would be worth mentioning this one, in case a change is possible.

If a change to to the workshop date isn't possible, we can obviously discuss it with the people signed up for Manchester 17. They may be happy to move that. There aren't that many of them at the moment so it would be better to have the conversation now, rather than after Manchester 17 has been advertised in a geonotice.

Yaris678 (talk) 15:18, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

That is an unfortunate clash. I'd like the folks from the north west to be able to come to this event. It is essential that this plan have a focus that extends beyond the M25 and the Watford Gap, and the best way to do that is to have people from places like the north west (where we have probably the largest and most active community outside the capital) come along to this session and contribute to the discussion. In terms of logistics, the meetup might be the most flexible of the two events and so the easiest to re-schedule. Tangentially, I'm aware that travel to London can be time-consuming and expensive (though probably less so than most other major cities for most people), and I hope the chapter's offer to consider covering travel costs will help with that. It would be a real shame if people felt they weren't able to contribute because they're a long way from London. Harry Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
So sorry that we are clashing - this will happen more and more as we have more and more activities.
In this specific case we are pinned down by GLAMWIKI and the Chapter's Conference (which takes out the Chair, Secretary. myself and at least one other trustee) and the need to get the process going in time for something significant to debate at the AGM. If Manchester could swap that would be marvellous. The answer is to plan further ahead to avoid clashes so put this event for 2014 in the diary now. It will be February 15th unless advised otherwise. Put it in your diary now! Jon Davies (WMUK) (talk) 10:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
We have moved the Manchester meetup to 6th of April, to avoid the clash. Yaris678 (talk) 10:40, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Yaris678 Jon Davies (WMUK) (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Expenses[edit | edit source]

"consider meeting travel expenses" is a bit woolly. What are the issues under consideration? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:26, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

It is as wooly as a Welsh hill sheep at the end of winter hiding in a corner lest the shearer gets him and deliberately so. As a general rule we will support people coming but there will need to be some consideration given to the issue of members who live in other countries for example (and quite a few do) this would be prohibitively expensive. I think the Midlands should be acceptable Andy. And don't forget we have a cycling mileage rate as well. Jon Davies (WMUK) (talk) 10:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Members Newsletter bit[edit | edit source]

Hi everyone -

In the Feb members newsletter we had a small piece to highlight the day - it would be nice if we could add a follow up in the March edition with any comments from attendees, pictures, a sense of what was good and what still needs to happen etc. Is there a willing victim volunteer who would be happy to write three paragraphs for me, and similarly, anyone happy to make sure some interesting photos are taken (with reference to the Photographs discussion page I started yesterday!) Katherine Bavage (WMUK) (talk) 15:51, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Question about Skype[edit | edit source]

Interested in this, but can't attend for certain geographical reasons. Could it be possible to Skype in live to participate (if not, filing the presentations would be most welcome). Wittylama (talk)

We have mentioned this and will look at itJon Davies (WMUK) (talk) 10:27, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
A Wikimedia version of the open source Big Blue Button is functional, hosted by WMCH, and free for our chapter related use at http://videoconf.wikimedia-chapters-association.org. It would be neat to use this event to try it out for real, it can record the session. (talk) 07:03, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Signup[edit | edit source]

Workshop A – Developing volunteering (limit of 20)[edit | edit source]

Morning session (11.00am)

  1. Carol Campbell
  2. Geri McLeary
  3. HJ Mitchell
  4. Ade Arogundade
  5. Marek69
  6. Philafrenzy

Afternoon session (1.30pm)

  1. Chmee2

Workshop B – GLAM (limit of 12)[edit | edit source]

Morning session (11.00am)

  1. Alastair McCapra
  2. David Brown
  3. Amit Bhagwat
  4. (talk)
  5. Mark Kelleher
  6. Tomasz Wlodarczyk
  7. Andy Mabbett

Afternoon session (1.30pm)

Workshop C – Education (limit of 10)[edit | edit source]

Morning session (11.00am)

  1. Preetha Bedi
  2. Heather McKnight
  3. Svitlana Yarmolchuk
  4. Chmee2
  5. Jack Nunn [TBC]

Afternoon session (1.30pm)

  1. Andy Mabbett
  2. Jack Nunn [TBC]

Workshop D – Becoming a trustee (limit of 16)[edit | edit source]

Afternoon session (1.30pm)

  1. Alastair McCapra
  2. David Brown
  3. Carol Campbell
  4. Amit Bhagwat
  5. Geri McLeary
  6. Preetha Bedi
  7. Heather McKnight
  8. Mark Kelleher
  9. Tomasz Wlodarczyk
  10. Lara Colvill
  11. Ade Arogundade
  12. Marek69
  13. Svitlana Yarmolchuk
  14. Andrew Davidson (talk)

Discussion[edit | edit source]

Can we discuss what we want the themes of our 5 year plan to be before we decide what the breakout sessions will be? GLAM and Education are what we've done so far, but until we've had the discussion we can't know if they are what we want to focus on over the next 5 years. --Tango (talk) 19:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
A couple of points to make. The event of the 23rd is only a part of the process. The form of the five year plan will emerge during that process. So the themes are not carved in stone. The discussions and notes from the event will form part of the evidence gathering that we can share with the wider community.

Secondly on the 23rd we have a chance for some face-to-face discussions. I hope these will be about what we hope to achieve over the next five years, in a nutshell 'where are we going' and 'how do we want to get there'? Otherwise there was a terrible danger of spending the day discussing what we should discuss.

Thirdly I have planned the day, and time was not on our side, to make it as flexible as possible, principally through two mechanisms; the Volunteer workshops can encompass a very broad range of themes and secondly the final session will be a chance to signal themes not covered otherwise. Looking at where we are likely to be working it seems obvious to me that GLAM and Education will be important elements of our programme, hence scheduling special time for those themes.

In this way I hope we can allow people to cover anything they want.

A final point is that this day is also for people interested in becoming trustees so there will also be readers and editors not yet intimately familiar with WMUK. I am hoping this will be a useful source of new ideas and inspiration.

Looking forward to a really positive day on Saturday.

Jon Davies (WMUK) (talk) 11:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

You shouldn't prejudge discussions - it has a tendency to bias things. Booking rooms for breakout sessions is a good idea, but let the initial discussion decide what we want to have breakout discussions on. I would have the session on becoming a trustee at a different time - people interested in becoming trustees will probably have very valuable contributions they can make to the discussions about the 5 year plan so we don't want to hide them away in another room. --Tango (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I have been to an unconference once, which worked very well in that context. Not sure that would be right for this context. I can see why time pressures on the day would mean that we should decide the sessions in advance. I probably wouldn't have the same sessions though. One thing of massive importance for WMUK is our relationship with other "players". e.g. the foundation, the chapters association, specific chapters, toolserver. This isn't something that can be dealt with so easily in terms of a *vision*. But visions often aren't the best way to deal with strategy anyway. Yaris678 (talk) 17:03, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I don't see why deciding them in advance saves time. The first part of the day will be a discussion about what the overall themes of our strategy will be (or, at least, it should be) so the breakout sessions should fall naturally out of that. I would like to have a zeroth part of the day to discuss what we actually mean by "strategy plan" as well - I think a lot of the problems we've had so far in coming up with one have been due to disagreements on what we are actually trying to come up with rather than disagreements over the contents. --Tango (talk) 18:19, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I can see that working. I would be happy to give a presentation based on applying the principles of Good Strategy/Bad Strategy to our context. Specifically, the idea that the kernel of a strategy has three things:
  • A diagnosis of the challenge to be overcome
  • A guiding policy
  • A coherent set of actions, consistent with the policy
Yaris678 (talk) 18:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Tango here - I'd much rather have seen the different workshops/working groups set up organically at the start of the day rather than being pre-defined. The only exception to that would be the 'becoming a trustee' section, as that's essential for the day (the original plan was for this to be a 'board interest day', with strategy added on - that seems to have been turned on its head here, probably for the best). It is a shame that it's competing with the other parallel sessions, though. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Video[edit | edit source]

Can we video some of these events please? I cannot recall the last time this year that the equipment kept in the office was used for any of the meetings I have been part of. Video helps with notes and for people that might want to review the workshop afterwards, we don't *have* to upload it to Commons. I am unlikely to be able to attend the trustee session and would like to be able to learn something from it. Thanks -- (talk) 12:47, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm assuming that this is a no? Could we know why? I had hoped that this might have presented a useful test of Big Blue Button before using it for the EGM. Thanks -- (talk) 18:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
It seems a little odd that participants did not know that some of the sessions were going to be videoed. As there had been no reply to these questions, it seemed reasonable to assume this was not going to happen. Is it allowed for the Trustees and other meeting participants to know what is going to happen to the video? As permission was not asked from those that took part, I doubt it can should be released to Wikimedia Commons. Thanks -- (talk) 08:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Video of the opening session and the closing session was recorded. As noted by yourself, we don't have to upload it to Commons. It is likely to be of more use internally. Announcing it was being recorded, and shared on Commons, would likely have restricted the feeling we wanted people to have of being able to speak freely. The video will be made available to any participant from the day on request. --Stevie Benton (WMUK) (talk) 12:44, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Waiting list[edit | edit source]

Fæ said: We have a waiting list? Wow. -- (talk) 12:52, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, the open day has been very popular but we are limited by space so numbers are being capped at 40. In case people drop out people can add their names to the waiting list. It's rather encouraging. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 13:04, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
And I've just struck the waiting list as we now have more space. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 17:44, 21 March 2013 (UTC)