Wikimania 2014

[Peter Damian]

Yes, by all means, let's make this all about appearances.

Appearance is everything. It is our means of signifying who we are. Nothing lies beneath.

[The Adversary]

Yes, by all means, let's make this all about appearances.

Appearance is everything. It is our means of signifying who we are. Nothing lies beneath.

Spoken like a true Wikipedian. (Online appearance, that is,)

[Tippi Hadron]

Yes, by all means, let's make this all about appearances.

Appearance is everything. It is our means of signifying who we are. Nothing lies beneath.

This message brought to you by the irresistibly gorgeous prof who usually comes to WO UK meet-ups looking like he got dressed in the dark. :)

I've got a few customers in the fashion industry, and I am intensely grateful for the fact that fashion is one of the last bastions where we can express who we truly are. My appreciation for Cla68 rose to new heights when he started a thread on the subject. That does not change the fact that there are plenty of people who never gave a rodent's posterior about what they look like and are unlikely to do so in the future. Should we discard their opinions because of that? Taking Jimbo to task for his Derelicte sense of style is easy enough. It shouldn't detract us from looking at what lies beneath. A gaping hollow, dressed in the admiration of equally hollow men.

As for Cla68, I don't know what he looks like in real life, but judging from his contributions on here, I bet he could rock this look for all it's worth – and then some:

[Tippi Hadron]

Points for spotting the handsome WO moderator in that picture.

Top left-hand corner, at the outskirt of the crowd.

Well done, lovely. Ready for round two?

By the way, Jimbo never went to Kazakstan, did he?

You mean we spoiled it for him? :D

[Peter Damian]

Well done, lovely. Ready for round two?

By the way, Jimbo never went to Kazakstan, did he?

You mean we spoiled it for him?

Far left again, sixth row from the back, seventh from the left, hand over his mouth. Et quis est iste, sitting on his left. Ecce.

[Tippi Hadron]

Far left again, sixth row from the back, seventh from the left, hand over his mouth. Et quis est iste, sitting on his left. Ecce.

I know that person, but I wasn't sure if that exceedingly attractive fellow miscreant wanted our darling wikilurkers to know what he looks like. :)

[Peter Damian]

Far left again, sixth row from the back, seventh from the left, hand over his mouth. Et quis est iste, sitting on his left. Ecce.

I know that person, but I wasn't sure if that exceedingly attractive fellow miscreant wanted our darling wikilurkers to know what he looks like.

I don't think they will get much from that. Thanks for reminding me of the pictures. I just found this presentation on 'human centred design' which I attended, and which would cause Vigilant to self-combust if he browsed through it, or if he had been there.

[Tippi Hadron]

Far left again, sixth row from the back, seventh from the left, hand over his mouth. Et quis est iste, sitting on his left. Ecce.

I know that person, but I wasn't sure if that exceedingly attractive fellow miscreant wanted our darling wikilurkers to know what he looks like. :)

I don't think they will get much from that. Thanks for reminding me of the pictures. I just found this presentation on 'human centred design' which I attended, and which would cause Vigilant to self-combust if he browsed through it, or if he had been there.

Oh dear. Who "designed" that ugly logo? Cthulhu would be proud. Regarding Vigilant, I'm still somewhat hopeful that he's chewing pencils as we speak, if only to avoid qualifying for the WO blog post writers' All Mouth No Trousers award.

Anyhow, here's proof that in World of Wiki, ill-fitting suit wears wearer:

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

I just found this presentation on 'human centred design' which I attended, and which would cause Vigilant to self-combust if he browsed through it, or if he had been there.

The community is the WMF's most important asset, especially those people who do not edit or even read Wikipedia yet, because of the lack of human-centered design. (Actually existing editors, who are predominantly American and European men, are apparently neither human nor part of the community.)
With human-centered design, African (wo)men will read and perhaps edit Wikipedia using mobile phones (with WikiZero).

[neved]

I chatted briefly with Fae who is quite unlike the character he portrays online. I think the internet has a bad effect on all of us.

And here's his opinion about you https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.p ... uselang=en

I doubt Peter Damian and me will ever claim to be friends, due to past unpleasantness of a nature that I am unlikely to ever forget. However, saying this, I do think it the right thing to do to allow anyone the potential to appeal against indef blocks, were he able to come back to this project with a credible request explaining how he would like to help contribute to our educational content and how he can avoid past problems, so that this project remains mellow and a positive non-hostile environment for all our contributors.

His use of Commons has been deliberately disruptive, and appears to have included using Commons as a means both to remotely poke at Wikipedia, plus a really stupid jibe at one of our long term contributors which might be interpreted by some as anti-gay. I may have been encouraged to support a block review in the short term, had Peter's reaction not been to immediately attempt to create public drama about his block off-wiki rather than, say, trying a proper apology for the target of his apparent trolling; even if he feels this was a misinterpretation. Given this context, I suggest that Peter is encouraged to reflect on what the Open Knowledge scope of this project is, and whether he can ever really be interested in doing more than using this site to inflame drama like it was 4Chan. I don't know how long serious reflection takes, but considering the upset recently caused, a period where his talk page access remains blocked is probably wise both for him and others affected, and I can't see much point in another unblock request until well into 2015. --Fæ (talk) 17:49, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

my bolding

[Zoloft]

I chatted briefly with Fae who is quite unlike the character he portrays online. I think the internet has a bad effect on all of us.

And here's his opinion about you https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.p ... uselang=en

I doubt Peter Damian and me will ever claim to be friends, due to past unpleasantness of a nature that I am unlikely to ever forget. However, saying this, I do think it the right thing to do to allow anyone the potential to appeal against indef blocks, were he able to come back to this project with a credible request explaining how he would like to help contribute to our educational content and how he can avoid past problems, so that this project remains mellow and a positive non-hostile environment for all our contributors.

His use of Commons has been deliberately disruptive, and appears to have included using Commons as a means both to remotely poke at Wikipedia, plus a really stupid jibe at one of our long term contributors which might be interpreted by some as anti-gay. I may have been encouraged to support a block review in the short term, had Peter's reaction not been to immediately attempt to create public drama about his block off-wiki rather than, say, trying a proper apology for the target of his apparent trolling; even if he feels this was a misinterpretation. Given this context, I suggest that Peter is encouraged to reflect on what the Open Knowledge scope of this project is, and whether he can ever really be interested in doing more than using this site to inflame drama like it was 4Chan. I don't know how long serious reflection takes, but considering the upset recently caused, a period where his talk page access remains blocked is probably wise both for him and others affected, and I can't see much point in another unblock request until well into 2015. --Fæ (talk) 17:49, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

my bolding

There does seem to be a slight curdling effect.

I believe this tendency to act out when other people can't punch you is a real motivational drag on the search for inner peace and a nice paella.

[Jim]

... which might be interpreted by some as anti-gay...

Do you think he still actively types this stuff, after all this time, or does he, by now, just use a "homophobo-bot" to ensure everything he posts contains at least one such implication?

[Zoloft]

... which might be interpreted by some as anti-gay...

Do you think he still actively types this stuff, after all this time, or does he, by now, just use a "homophobo-bot" to ensure everything he posts contains at least one such implication?

That seems a bit unfær.

[Jim]

That seems a bit unfær.

Probably.
I guess it irks me a little that in most situations this kind of long term, repetitive "wolf crying" would lead to a loss of credibility and be counter-productive.
Fae, however, does manage to sometimes get what he wants this way - enough to give him no real incentive to stop, I guess...

Obviously it would be unfair to imply that he also just enjoys playing the victim unless there was other solid evidence of that kind of thing, so, yeah...

I'll go take my loving thoughtfulness pill now...

[Peter Damian]

"The Arbitration Committee has some things it should be telling the community" If you continue to promulgate these unpleasant, unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, I will block you myself. You are disrupting the arbitration process, and you ought to know better. AGK 19:06, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I've already emailed another member of the committee about my concerns, which often involved telephone calls and not emails, not to mention personal meetings; neither the calls nor the meetings are recorded, so there's nothing "provable". You and I have disagreed about the scope of the committee pretty much since you were a clerk; when I've tried to reach out to you in the past - offline, so as not to embarrass you - you've accused me of some pretty nasty things. I'm assuming when we met at Wikimania your silence was either shyness or distaste; I very much doubt you were struck speechless by my presence. :-) You and I have a very long history, AGK, and you would not be uninvolved. Meanwhile, how does the committee think that delaying a decision for 60 days is any more likely to result in a solution? How does keeping this door open encourage editors to participate in the global discussion? Risker (talk) 19:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I didn't realise AGK was at the London conference.

[Peter Damian]

Speaking of which, is there a thread on the weird stuff on that page?

Risker, it is casting aspersions regarding the Committee and Committee members, as you did in this edit, when you know that the information you can use as evidence cannot be discussed in public. Also continuing to argue that the Committee doesn't have jurisdiction after the case has been accepted arguments to that effect have been dismissed is disruptive, such as this and this. Also reverting Hasteur's attempt to move on wasn't the right course of action, instead it would have been much better to contact a clerk and ask us to deal with it. Please stop editing disruptively, continuing to do so may lead to sanctions such as a ban from participating in the case or threaded discussion. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:20, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

"they're so ridiculously self-important, when they aren't acting like trolls, and show no sense of grace, humanity, or even style. Admins and even rank-and-file contributors go around making high-sounding declarations and announcements, as if they were government officials dispensing court orders. " etc.

Ah yes here viewtopic.php?p=109239#p109239

[thekohser]

That seems a bit unfær.

Calling Wil Sinclaer to the BigotPhone. Calling Wil Sinclaer...

[tarantino]

wikimedia UK is struggling after spending around £130,000 on wikimania 2014,

Gordon Joly says,

The Board are working on the collapse of WMUK finances! They
even have a camera: they are looking into it.

https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Minutes_2014-12-13

From the linked document:

We are looking at a deficit of around £217,000 when compared with the tentative budget discussed in September (which included figures based on the FDC bid). These results were a surprise although the problems we had at the previous meeting were an indicator. In broad figures the deficit can be broken down as follows:

Wikimania incurred a net cost to the charity of around £130,000 (the exact figure is still under investigation)
Transition costs for the CE are £57,000
There is a recent £30,000 spend on WiR programmes that we have asked D'Arcy to try to defer to the next financial year.

Given that we were tentatively budgeting a shortfall of £148,000 (after FDC funds reduction) this is a significantly worse result than we were expecting and we had an in camera session to look at the way forward. We asked for a full breakdown of Wikimania to be brought to the board as a separate document.

[Hex]

we have to have the courage to turn projects down and acknowledge that our charitable aims are best met by doing a limited number of projects exceptionally well than accepting a multitude of ideas that we don't have the resources to follow up on

[DanMurphy]

These results were a surprise.

[lilburne]

These results were a surprise.

Next time steal porn photos.

[Cla68]

wikimedia UK is struggling after spending around £130,000 on wikimania 2014,

Gordon Joly says,

The Board are working on the collapse of WMUK finances! They
even have a camera: they are looking into it.

https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Minutes_2014-12-13

From the linked document:

We are looking at a deficit of around £217,000 when compared with the tentative budget discussed in September (which included figures based on the FDC bid). These results were a surprise although the problems we had at the previous meeting were an indicator. In broad figures the deficit can be broken down as follows:

Wikimania incurred a net cost to the charity of around £130,000 (the exact figure is still under investigation)
Transition costs for the CE are £57,000
There is a recent £30,000 spend on WiR programmes that we have asked D'Arcy to try to defer to the next financial year.

Given that we were tentatively budgeting a shortfall of £148,000 (after FDC funds reduction) this is a significantly worse result than we were expecting and we had an in camera session to look at the way forward. We asked for a full breakdown of Wikimania to be brought to the board as a separate document.

Good grief what a comedy of errors this organization is if this is true.

[DanMurphy]

Transition costs for the CE are £57,000.

That's $84,000 in Federal Reserve-bucks, for those following along at home.

[DanMurphy]

Who coulda sawn it coming?

Statement by D'Arcy Myers, interim chief executive:

As a part of my work as the interim chief executive of Wikimedia UK the board asked me to undertake a review of our structure and organisation. This task has been ongoing for some time and concluded with the board meeting held this past weekend.

With the board, I have concluded that some changes to the composition and structure of the staff team will position the charity to deliver best impact against our charitable objectives.

These changes may result in some redundancies, and the staff affected are being informed. This has been a challenging time and I thank the staff team for their professionalism throughout this period of review.

I look forward to continuing to lead the charity through the ongoing transition until a permanent chief executive is in post and ready to
take over.

Adding: This old thread has some useful recent history on the WMUK follies.

[Vigilant]

The WMF has it within the power and prerogative to rescue the WMUK folks.

That they aren't doing anything besides politely watching as the most historically corrupt wiki chapter in the world goes under speaks volumes.

[Randy from Boise]

The WMF has it within the power and prerogative to rescue the WMUK folks.

That they aren't doing anything besides politely watching as the most historically corrupt wiki chapter in the world goes under speaks volumes.

I'm got sure "corrupt" is the right word...

Equal measures of bureaucracy, self-importance, entitlement, and profligacy with the checkbook, leaving no room for even a dollop of common sense.

Sort of a distilled essence of what ails the Central Office in San Francisco...


RfB

[Vigilant]

The WMF has it within the power and prerogative to rescue the WMUK folks.

That they aren't doing anything besides politely watching as the most historically corrupt wiki chapter in the world goes under speaks volumes.

I'm got sure "corrupt" is the right word...

Equal measures of bureaucracy, self-importance, entitlement, and profligacy with the checkbook, leaving no room for even a dollop of common sense.

Sort of a distilled essence of what ails the Central Office in San Francisco...


RfB

What other word would you use?

Ashley van Haeften's entire tenure
Project Gibraltar
QR code fiasco with the sitting chairman
Free hardware for everyone
Fundraising capability pulled by the WMF
Lying to the British Parliment about their charity status
Now this overspending idiocy

What else would you call it?
What would a newspaper article call it?
If it weren't such small beer, what would an honest police report call it?

[eppur si muove]

Presumably Slimy Jon Davies was helped out the door without being sacked. So he is getting paid time in lieu whilst someone else is acting CEO and that accounts for why the transitions costs are so high. Of course this means that they've got to get rid of one extra post when the redundancies kick in.

[Jim]

Presumably Slimy Jon Davies was helped out the door without being sacked. So he is getting paid time in lieu whilst someone else is acting CEO and that accounts for why the transitions costs are so high. Of course this means that they've got to get rid of one extra post when the redundancies kick in.

The "Cavalry" bloke may be suitable. He could blog to the BBC about his unfortunate unemployment again.

[DanMurphy]

Wikimania incurred a net cost to the charity of around £130,000 (the exact figure is still under investigation)

How on earth did they manage to do this? £50 registration fee for a three-day conference. This says "over 2,000 attendees." That's a deficit of £65 per participant.

We lose 5 pence on every single one of these records that we sell.

[Jim]

How on earth did they manage to do this?

You somehow have to smile. They are poor, amateur grifters, who, when presented with a massive opportunity to grift effortlessly, fucked it up completely. Go figure.

[DanMurphy]

How on earth did they manage to do this?

You somehow have to smile. They are poor, amateur grifters, who, when presented with a massive opportunity to grift effortlessly, fucked it up completely. Go figure.

Ah. Final Attendance was 1520. That's a deficit of £85 per participant.

The bid committee in order of appearance.

Heckuva job, Wikipediers!

Jimmy Wales - Co-Founder of Wikipedia

Edward Saperia - I have many years of event experience and a great many useful London contacts and resources. Jimmy entrusted me to organise the London VIP Wikipedia 10th Birthday party.

James Knight - Investment Banking background with experience in events organisation. Currently working for a start-up company in Shoreditch while pursuing other projects.

Kimi Lawrie - Educated at Goldsmiths University, professional web designer and developer, designer of Wikimania London website.

Anastasia Andrianova - Professional background in investment banking, principal investments and private equity, with experience of fundraising. Her primary areas of responsibility are fundraising and securing strategic participants/contributors to the event, i.e. helping Wikimedia UK secure all the resources necessary for a successful bid.

Saad Choudri - Saad Choudri is a qualified solicitor practising law in the video games industry. Saad joined Miniclip in 2011 after almost four years at SEGA. When not working Saad spends his time designing and publishing board games through his company Legend Express. Saad is a co-opted trustee of Wikimedia UK.

Declan Pattison - With a career spanning three decades encompassing TV, Film, Art, Theatre and Education. Primarily focusing on lighting design and production. Recent exploits include production of costume and prop elements for national advertising campaigns for TalkTalk, The Xfactor, Adidas and LFW. In recent years he has devoted time to engaging the next generation of production professionals by delivering btec national courses in entertainment production.

[eppur si muove]

So Jimmy with his history of directorships of loss-making companies and two investment bankers putting themselves forward not long after the worldwide triumph of their industry in 2008, not to mention the continuing fines from regulators who were not paying attention. Is it any surprise that they lost money?

Now, who was the idiot at WMUK who agreed to underwrite this?

[DanMurphy]

So Jimmy with his history of directorships of loss-making companies and two investment bankers putting themselves forward not long after the worldwide triumph of their industry in 2008, not to mention the continuing fines from regulators who were not paying attention. Is it any surprise that they lost money. Now, who was the idiot at WMUK who agreed to underwrite this?

Sure smells like there's a small dodgy story in here. Aside from Choudry, they don't seem to be involved in WMUK at all. It appears Team WMUK agreed to take on financial responsibility for an event it didn't organize. Doh!

[Peter Damian]

So Jimmy with his history of directorships of loss-making companies and two investment bankers putting themselves forward not long after the worldwide triumph of their industry in 2008, not to mention the continuing fines from regulators who were not paying attention. Is it any surprise that they lost money?

Now, who was the idiot at WMUK who agreed to underwrite this?

I was told last year that they were disappointed about the successful bid because it would be a burden on the already strained finances. But that begs the question of why they bid in the first place.

[DanMurphy]

Went done the rabbit hole a bit.

Wikipedia signpost from last July quotes Saperia, the "conference director," as implying they'd budgeted for 3,000 participants, despite the previous record attendance for a Wikimania, in Washington DC in 2012, was "about 1,400."

They also appeared to have convinced themselves they'd raise big money with something called a "Wikifest" though someone with a brain in their head headed them off at the pass.

Revenue was pegged at £860,000, with £500,000 from corporate sponsorships, £300,000 from the Wikifest ("6000 [2000 daily passes per day] at £50 each"; more on what happened to the Wikifest is below), and £60,000 from the registration fees for Wikimedia movement attendees.

The selection committee forced the London team to sharply reduce their budget. Serious consideration was given to re-opening the bidding process to different cities who could provide a less "costly and complicated [conference with a] simpler core budget and lower-cost options for attendees." Hare wrote to the Signpost that "their original proposal was sweeping in scope, calling for a huge outreach component attracting 10,000 people over the duration of the conference. We had doubts about the feasibility of such a proposal, so we asked them to produce a more realistic budget in the event they did not hit their revenue targets."

The London organizers responded by offering three separate budgets: "core", "basic", and "luxury". They were awarded the conference on the basis of the first, with projected revenues of £214,000: £99,000 from the WMF, £85,000 from sponsorships, and £30,000 from 1500 registrations. Costs would be £211,882, including a projected £40,000 for the Barbican Centre.

Young and Garfield Byrd, the Chief of Finance and Administration at the WMF, told the Signpost that the total budget for Wikimania 2014 is around $500,000. This includes the cost of the Barbican Centre, which jumped from £40,000 ($61,000) in the initial proposal to £120,000 ($205,000), though it started even lower.

On the one hand: Astonishing. On the other: But of course.

Saperia has had a relationship with Wales since at least 2010.

Fittingly, Saperia’s character in The Clockwork Quartet (he is a performer also) is that of the Magician, a puppet master who is always trying to bend the other characters and the world to his will. All of the main characters in The Clockwork Quartet are grounded in the qualities of the performers that inhabit them. Hannah Ballou, who plays the saucy Raconteuse, is a cabaret and burlesque performer. Matthew Williamson, who plays the Doctor, is a real life doctor of zoology. The project’s sound engineer, independent music producer Ashley Gardner, plays The Engineer.

... He makes serious use of social networking (he has well over a thousand facebook friends) to promote The Clockwork Quartet and his other projects, which include a biannual collective music event called “Acid Jam,” and throwing parties (“a chance to get all the interesting people I know together on the moments I actually leave the house.”) His latest party, a fundraiser for Wikipedia featuring guest of honor Jimmy Wales, will make use of the use beautiful mechanized set the Shunt theatre company built for their critically acclaimed show Money.

Ed Saperia holds court in his London flat, a vivid expression of his free-ranging personality.

[Peter Damian]

Went done the rabbit hole a bit.

Wikipedia signpost from last July quotes Saperia, the "conference director," as implying they'd budgeted for 3,000 participants, despite the previous record attendance for a Wikimania, in Washington DC in 2012, was "about 1,400."

They also appeared to have convinced themselves they'd raise big money with something called a "Wikifest" though someone with a brain in their head headed them off at the pass.

Revenue was pegged at £860,000, with £500,000 from corporate sponsorships, £300,000 from the Wikifest ("6000 [2000 daily passes per day] at £50 each"; more on what happened to the Wikifest is below), and £60,000 from the registration fees for Wikimedia movement attendees.

The selection committee forced the London team to sharply reduce their budget. Serious consideration was given to re-opening the bidding process to different cities who could provide a less "costly and complicated [conference with a] simpler core budget and lower-cost options for attendees." Hare wrote to the Signpost that "their original proposal was sweeping in scope, calling for a huge outreach component attracting 10,000 people over the duration of the conference. We had doubts about the feasibility of such a proposal, so we asked them to produce a more realistic budget in the event they did not hit their revenue targets."

The London organizers responded by offering three separate budgets: "core", "basic", and "luxury". They were awarded the conference on the basis of the first, with projected revenues of £214,000: £99,000 from the WMF, £85,000 from sponsorships, and £30,000 from 1500 registrations. Costs would be £211,882, including a projected £40,000 for the Barbican Centre.

Young and Garfield Byrd, the Chief of Finance and Administration at the WMF, told the Signpost that the total budget for Wikimania 2014 is around $500,000. This includes the cost of the Barbican Centre, which jumped from £40,000 ($61,000) in the initial proposal to £120,000 ($205,000), though it started even lower.

On the one hand: Astonishing. On the other: But of course.

Saperia has had a relationship with Wales since at least 2010.

Fittingly, Saperia’s character in The Clockwork Quartet (he is a performer also) is that of the Magician, a puppet master who is always trying to bend the other characters and the world to his will. All of the main characters in The Clockwork Quartet are grounded in the qualities of the performers that inhabit them. Hannah Ballou, who plays the saucy Raconteuse, is a cabaret and burlesque performer. Matthew Williamson, who plays the Doctor, is a real life doctor of zoology. The project’s sound engineer, independent music producer Ashley Gardner, plays The Engineer.

... He makes serious use of social networking (he has well over a thousand facebook friends) to promote The Clockwork Quartet and his other projects, which include a biannual collective music event called “Acid Jam,” and throwing parties (“a chance to get all the interesting people I know together on the moments I actually leave the house.”) His latest party, a fundraiser for Wikipedia featuring guest of honor Jimmy Wales, will make use of the use beautiful mechanized set the Shunt theatre company built for their critically acclaimed show Money.

OK so it wasn't the attendance that compromised it - that was on target. Assuming they got the £99,000 from WMF, what went wrong to cause the £130,000 deficit? There was an increase from £40,000 to £120,000 for the Barbican. How did they manage that, given that everything would have been at fixed cost beforehand. And that only explains £80,000.

I went to the free WMUK party at Searcy's and had a few glasses of wine. I wonder if that explains it.

[eppur si muove]

A week after Wikimania, I was at Loncon 3, last years world science fiction convention. I had a conversation with the staff member who was liaison with the main site and he commented how they had made sure that the facilities costs were pegged in the signed contract. The site wanted to hike them and were told where to go.

The accounts at roughly the time Signpost talked to Saperia and co looked like this http://www.loncon3.org/documents/wsfs-421-loncon3.pdf. The pass along funds are an indication of how the previous few Worldcons also all ran at profits and were able to help their successors. Unlike Wikimania, Worldcon staff are all unpaid.

[Hex]

Ed Saperia

I've gotten to know Ed a little since Wikimania, in a totally non-Wikipedia context. He has eclectic interests and a talent for networking. I think he's a good egg.

[DanMurphy]

Ed Saperia

I've gotten to know Ed a little since Wikimania, in a totally non-Wikipedia context. He has eclectic interests and a talent for networking. I think he's a good egg.

Maybe so. But at best completely incompetent at running a charity conference. You wouldn't believe it from my online manner but I used to be involved in organizing and promoting raves, art events, burning man stuff. I know many people with eclectic interests and am the better for it. They're never the ones I put in charge of the finances.

Why on earth was this man put in charge by Wales and why on earth did the WMUK fools go along with it? If I was running WMUK I would have offered to assist "WMUK 2014" at cost and not a penny less.

Eppur:

They made sure that the facilities costs were pegged in the signed contract. The site wanted to hike them and were told where to go.

Yes. This is how competent people go about it.

[Vigilant]

Ed Saperia

I've gotten to know Ed a little since Wikimania, in a totally non-Wikipedia context. He has eclectic interests and a talent for networking. I think he's a good egg.

Maybe so. But at best completely incompetent at running a charity conference. You wouldn't believe it from my online manner but I used to be involved in organizing and promoting raves, art events, burning man stuff. I know many people with eclectic interests and am the better for it. They're never the ones I put in charge of the finances.

Why on earth was this man put in charge by Wales and why on earth did this WMUK fools go along with it? If I was running WMUK I would have offered to assist "WMUK 2014" at cost and not a penny less.

It's the new "wiki way"!

People who have actual experience are excluded from doing what they've shown to be competent to do.
New, exciting, eclectic, non-boring people are hired to show their ... 'quality' and sweep away the sad remnants of a useful but patriarchal, top-down, assault on the competency challenged!

[Cla68]

Went done the rabbit hole a bit.

Wikipedia signpost from last July quotes Saperia, the "conference director," as implying they'd budgeted for 3,000 participants, despite the previous record attendance for a Wikimania, in Washington DC in 2012, was "about 1,400."

They also appeared to have convinced themselves they'd raise big money with something called a "Wikifest" though someone with a brain in their head headed them off at the pass.

Revenue was pegged at £860,000, with £500,000 from corporate sponsorships, £300,000 from the Wikifest ("6000 [2000 daily passes per day] at £50 each"; more on what happened to the Wikifest is below), and £60,000 from the registration fees for Wikimedia movement attendees.

The selection committee forced the London team to sharply reduce their budget. Serious consideration was given to re-opening the bidding process to different cities who could provide a less "costly and complicated [conference with a] simpler core budget and lower-cost options for attendees." Hare wrote to the Signpost that "their original proposal was sweeping in scope, calling for a huge outreach component attracting 10,000 people over the duration of the conference. We had doubts about the feasibility of such a proposal, so we asked them to produce a more realistic budget in the event they did not hit their revenue targets."

The London organizers responded by offering three separate budgets: "core", "basic", and "luxury". They were awarded the conference on the basis of the first, with projected revenues of £214,000: £99,000 from the WMF, £85,000 from sponsorships, and £30,000 from 1500 registrations. Costs would be £211,882, including a projected £40,000 for the Barbican Centre.

Young and Garfield Byrd, the Chief of Finance and Administration at the WMF, told the Signpost that the total budget for Wikimania 2014 is around $500,000. This includes the cost of the Barbican Centre, which jumped from £40,000 ($61,000) in the initial proposal to £120,000 ($205,000), though it started even lower.

On the one hand: Astonishing. On the other: But of course.

Saperia has had a relationship with Wales since at least 2010.

Fittingly, Saperia’s character in The Clockwork Quartet (he is a performer also) is that of the Magician, a puppet master who is always trying to bend the other characters and the world to his will. All of the main characters in The Clockwork Quartet are grounded in the qualities of the performers that inhabit them. Hannah Ballou, who plays the saucy Raconteuse, is a cabaret and burlesque performer. Matthew Williamson, who plays the Doctor, is a real life doctor of zoology. The project’s sound engineer, independent music producer Ashley Gardner, plays The Engineer.

... He makes serious use of social networking (he has well over a thousand facebook friends) to promote The Clockwork Quartet and his other projects, which include a biannual collective music event called “Acid Jam,” and throwing parties (“a chance to get all the interesting people I know together on the moments I actually leave the house.”) His latest party, a fundraiser for Wikipedia featuring guest of honor Jimmy Wales, will make use of the use beautiful mechanized set the Shunt theatre company built for their critically acclaimed show Money.

OK so it wasn't the attendance that compromised it - that was on target. Assuming they got the £99,000 from WMF, what went wrong to cause the £130,000 deficit? There was an increase from £40,000 to £120,000 for the Barbican. How did they manage that, given that everything would have been at fixed cost beforehand. And that only explains £80,000.

I went to the free WMUK party at Searcy's and had a few glasses of wine. I wonder if that explains it.

It appears they realistically projected the revenues, but it looks like they underestimated the costs. So, now that the bills have all rolled in, they wonder how they committed so much money they didn't have. Whoever the project manager was for the conference probably should be held personally liable for the overrun.

[SB_Johnny]

The WMF has it within the power and prerogative to rescue the WMUK folks.

That they aren't doing anything besides politely watching as the most historically corrupt wiki chapter in the world goes under speaks volumes.

The WMUK has been an absolute nightmare for the WMF, and they need to keep it at arm's length to maintain plausible deniability if and when somebody important notices it.

What speaks even more volumes is that Jimmy the court fool Wales has been careful never to be associated with them. Rich dictators frown on incompetence, after all.

[Vigilant]

The WMF has it within the power and prerogative to rescue the WMUK folks.

That they aren't doing anything besides politely watching as the most historically corrupt wiki chapter in the world goes under speaks volumes.

The WMUK has been an absolute nightmare for the WMF, and they need to keep it at arm's length to maintain plausible deniability if and when somebody important notices it.

What speaks even more volumes is that Jimmy the court fool Wales has been careful never to be associated with them. Rich dictators frown on other people's incompetence, after all.

[Notvelty]

It appears they realistically projected the revenues, but it looks like they underestimated the costs. So, now that the bills have all rolled in, they wonder how they committed so much money they didn't have. Whoever the project manager was for the conference probably should be held personally liable for the overrun.

These people would have had junior roles in events with some prestige in the past, leading them to think that they can manage a full one. Wikimedia were drawn in by the "resume" experience and the dropping of names, without asking what they really did. For example, Anastasia's resume could be the resume of someone quite senior, or it could be the resume of an executive assistant who got handed the job of catering the odd executive knees-up.

If they were junior event planners, EAs, etc., it would have given them a lack of understanding of the real costs of a lot of things that they are used to from their pasts. "Cool" conference stuff is expensive and often comes out of separate budgets or is absorbed by sponsorships or (in the case of free wine) patronages or is obtained on a quid-pro-quo basis by event planners with years of experience and years of favours upon which to draw.

Audio visual support can be as much as US10k per venue day - if you're not paying attention. If you don't know the venue, you're paying up to a thousand or so more just for the hire than you probably need to. Start getting half smart and guaranteeing a set number of people to get a better deal and you could be faced with penalties for every one not turning up.

What happens to drinks prices if you stay an hour longer? Did you order "another round" of canapes thinking that it would be at the price you were originally quoted for the bulk order?

Damage a fixture? Did you pre-negotiate a minimum support level with the venue or did you just ask someone to fix up some carpet at $300 per hour? And don't get started on electrical work.

Then there is transport, accommodation. "Oh, did we forget to tell you - all the people who decided to stay at the hotel at the last minute get the walk-in rate, not the quoted rate, even though you booked some rooms. By the way, those holds for 3000 people don't come free..."

Just off the top of my head.

[Vigilant]

I wonder if there are people "in the real world" who have experience with this sort of thing???!

Perhaps some of them just might be better at it than randomly selected introverts from a farcical encyclopedia project...

[thekohser]

Anastasia had experience at Lehman Brothers. Perhaps, "enough said"?

[eppur si muove]

Ed was another investment banker. Makes three on the committee.

[Peter Damian]

It appears they realistically projected the revenues, but it looks like they underestimated the costs.

It's normally the other way round, although I note Notvelty's comment above about 'unforeseen' costs.

[Notvelty]

It appears they realistically projected the revenues, but it looks like they underestimated the costs.

It's normally the other way round, although I note Notvelty's comment above about 'unforeseen' costs.

Some of the biggest expenses are those which are "known" but are incurred as a result of believing that they are things that must be done at a conference and/or that they are paid for by conference organisers.

Go to a big, tier 1 event (say the world's biggest mining conference, AIMEX) and you can dine out and get shlozzled on expensive stuff every day for free if you are of a mind. But each such trip to the bar is handled by a different sponsor or delegate company and the funds for that often come out of a separate marketing or corporate entertaining budget. In some cases, it 's claimed as part of the personal expenses claim by some CEO or other.

This isn't visible to the average punter or junior event person.