On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 10:59 PM, Katie Chan <ktc(a)ktchan.info> wrote:
On 13/01/2014 03:35, Samuel Klein wrote:
I don't understand why the current scholarship criteria make no mention
of need.
Are they meant to be for newcomers, or for the same community members
each year?
Per my reply on [[wm2014:Talk:Scholarships]], there's simply no way for
the reviewers or the WMF to verify someone actual needs. Unless we are
comfortable and want to move down the road of asking for and checking each
applicants personal financial circumstances before awarding a scholarship,
there's no fair and accurate way of taking needs into account.
Thank you, Katie. I think it would be enough to state whether the
scholarships are meant for those who cannot afford to attend, or whether
they are meant to reward active participants. These are totally different
goals. Our community is generally good-hearted: those who might apply
under one circumstance would not under the other.
Nemo's proposal seems to provide a more nuanced way forward without
checking financial circumstances. It also offers partial scholarships
(which I think are a good idea, for just this reason).
I too am concerned that the current scholarship process tends to
polarize the
community, and too often simply rewards long-time community
members, or those who are connected to large movement entities, with
free travel: rather than increasing the diversity of new voices and
faces at global events.
This is a discussion the community should have. However, I can say now
that I know of many people who not only disagree with the above, but think
the exact opposite is actually taking place. Namely, that dedicated and
long term contributors are missing out in the name of balance and diversity
to those who have barely contributed to our projects and unlikely to do
much in the future either.
Those are not opposites, exactly.
We have had people who barely contribute getting scholarships. That is not
healthy.
We have also had people who regularly get scholarships, and come to feel
that this is deserved as a result of their contributions (and feel rejected
when they don't get one). That feels to me like the situation Fedora was
in; also unhealthy.
Perhaps we can change our notion of 'balance and diversity' so that it
draws from our community of thousands of enormously active contributors who
would benefit from sharing experiences and learning from other parts of our
shared community, but have never yet done so. Most of those contributors
do not apply for scholarships; barely know they exist; and do not think of
coming to international events.
Personally, I think a balance need to be struck between the two.
Yes.
SJ