Wikimedia Conference 2012/Program brainstorming

Suggestions

This is an open list for collecting ideas. No particular order for the ideas.

• State of the chapters (each chapter gets three minutes - 120 minutes in total, split into two sessions of one hour)
  • Is it really needed to do this within the conference (again)? Most chapters will talk about those issues raised in “Will we keep doing the same old Wiki academies, meetups and lectures in libraries?” Wouldn't it be better to write the results down and share them before the conference? We would save a lot of time that could be used for the other, imho more important issues. A (short) introduction of participants should be scheduled nonetheless, maybe lasting for 30 (to 45 minutes) alltogether. Kind regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 13:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
  • It would be nice if these time allocations could be a bit more lenient. I noted that some chapters, such as our chapter (Wikimedia ZA), almost had noting to report back on but were still given the complete timeslot. You then get other chapters which held many activities during the previous years, but were then cut of at exactly three minutes. Chapters such as WMZA would appreciate it if we could hear in more detail about the bigger chapters, because they are our role models. LouriePieterse
  • Personally I would be in favor of making this even less (2 minutes! 1,5 minute would probably be stretching it) and that way allow a bit of time at the end for Q&A to those chapters that sounded most interesting. If we could really do it in 40x2 minutes = 100 minutes (take enough time for changing) we could even do it in one slot of 2h and have time for questions and be done with it the first day already! (or twice an hour) That way we can focus in the actual sessions on the real in depth. DerHexer: I think this is an extremely helpful session compared to writing down, because it becomes much more vivid this way. People have the opportunity to write it down in a chapter report already. It would be nice though if someone would take the chance and make a real summery out of it and publish that as a Real Report. Effeietsanders (talk) 20:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
    • Now that I have thought more about this, I agree with you two. A shorter time shouldn't be a problem. LouriePieterse 07:09, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
• Panel on Chapter selected Wikimedia Foundation board seats and their election process
• Affiliated groups (non-chapters): chapters' take on this controversial topic
  • Definitely agree on discussing this important topic. LouriePieterse
• Chapter geographic and cultural uniqueness. From our experience (WMZA) it seems like the WMF tries to treat each chapter according to a generic chapter model, which we believe comes short to the specific needs and environment of certain chapters. LouriePieterse
  • Yes, Brazil problem, we change our ways and disconnected this model is imposed by WMF... Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m

• Chapter development: practical sessions delivered by NGO training professionals and/or people from more experienced chapters. The sessions should include tutoring and training for chapters on how to develop, with a focus on a practical skill set:
  • Business correspondence
  • Hiring
  • Budget and finances
  • Negotiation skills
  • Etc.
• Friends in disagreement? Dispelling some of the tensions between chapters and WMF, mainly about fundraising and money: getting to know each other better personally, understanding the other side's positions, and admitting our own mistakes: on the way to peace making in a movement torn apart by infighting.
  • I believe an extra large timeslot should be allocated to this topic, because recently almost everyone is in disagreement about this. We should try to reach consensus on it at the meeting, and not just say "we will discuss the final details on the mailing list", because this tends not to work. LouriePieterse
• Chapter death: what to do when the group of active people in a chapter disappears and/or a chapter goes dormant. How to set up an alternative chapter, how to revoke chapter status.
  • I would prefer to give this a bit broader scope: how to handle dormant chapters - where there can be also options discussed for revival. Effeietsanders (talk) 20:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
• Removing the locks from the exclusive social club: how to federalize chapters, get people and groups in remote places involved, and work together with other organizations with different interests and attitudes? Case studies and lessons learned.
• The impossible mission of discussing matters among 39 bodies of volunteers. How to get everyone involved, or at least listening?
• Coordinating projects and plans for software development work, as preparation for hackathons.
• The future of the Wikimedia Conference / Chapters Meeting: forever in Berlin?! Who will pay the bills in the future?
• Chapters, real-world politics and lobbying: ACTA, SOPA, PIPA... are we involved? Should we be involved? What are the dangers to chapters' neutrality?
  • Probably this discussion should be split in proactive and reactive lobbying. Effeietsanders (talk) 20:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
• Minding our demographics: reaching out to under-represented groups such as minority populations, the elderly and women. Closing the gender gap. Perhaps with invited guests for this topic.
• Strategic plans and why they matter. Case studies from chapters who already created strategic plans.
• Organizational Growth & Development Network - a pilot project and its result, the way forward. Presentation by Sebastian Moleski.
• Regional cooperation between chapters: fruitful and empowering cooperation or just more reasons for flying?
• Chapters in 2022: what do we do ten years from now? Will we keep doing the same old Wiki academies, meetups and lectures in libraries? Won't we run out of steam? Rethinking and revisiting the chapter model and the standard chapter work. A session for futurists.

This excites me - where are we going, looking over the horizon. Jon Davies WMUK (talk) 12:09, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

• Parallel sessions around projects involving several chapters.
  • Wiki Loves Monuments workshop/discussion (Lodewijk, if present, would be happy to prepare & run) - introduction session or more in-depth? We could probably easily spend 4 hours on this, so I need to make a good choice here. Effeietsanders (talk) 20:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
  • The Next Wiki Loves Monuments - brainstorming. Would it be possible to come up with another multi chapter project for 2013, which involves multiple Wikimedia organizations? Lets think out of the box and see where we end up. Effeietsanders (talk) 20:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Iberocoop chapters are going to do WLM (although we're thinking of a more localized name) together this year, so some input/advice would be of help. --Jewbask (talk) 02:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

• Effective external communications: press releases, and how to achieve your goals with them. Effeietsanders (talk) 20:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
• As the Brazilian model can solve the problem of agreement fundraising. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 12:51, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
  • +1. I would be highly interesed if I was not a brazilian. MetalBrasil (talk) 16:06, 6 March 2012 (UTC)