[Wikimania-l] Wikimania meeting minutes 2005/11/05

Fri Nov 11 08:42:08 UTC 2005

Hi everybody,

I'm very sorry that i didn't was at the IRC meeting because i didn't 
noticed the date. Also  i have realy a lot to do in the moment and i  
was ill in this week. But i hope i can make some comments :-)

>9B.  Naming : JamesF liked "symposium" better than conference, but
>didn't find broad support . (Wikisym's use of the term was noted.)  
>Mysekurity suggested "the [N]th First Annual" conference, a la the
>Ignobels.  MikeSnow chimed in with "Wikimania 2.0".
>
>  
>
There also was a Wikiposium in Austria:
http://www.ocg.at/kultur/wikiposium.html

But the name sound to academic. I would like more Wikimania 2.0 but with 
that I'm thinking about a stable vision and a sentence like "edit this 
conference" will not fit.

>16. Conference planning software. No word from Austin, Jakob, or
>Patrick; it is generally agreed that a license agreement on paper
>submission makes sense.  JamesF mentions that he was at some point
>happy to help Austin improve on last year's reg system; regrets
>mentioning it again :-)  It is also agreed we should choose our
>program planning software in time for the program team to look at it.
>  
>
Okay here are my words ;-): I'm not a developer so wanna have (if you 
like to have me in the programm team again) a software that is running 
(okay a few errors will be okay if it open source and they will be fixed 
soon), but please no alpha testing i think we will get more papers than 
last year and we will come realy in trouble. Deplhine wrote that she 
don't want pentadwarf because it's need new browsers, but how manny 
people will effect by this. Only the programm team and for tham it 
wouldn't be a problem to use a new firefox, or?

>17. Program team and Papers
>This team is one of the first to act.  How will it be structured?  Who
>will be on it?  Who will lead it?  We should get help from outside the
>community; technologists and academics (e.g., Sunir, others from
>Wikimania '05?) methodically split up papers into review groups.
>    Amgine notes CfPs should have a postmark deadline.  Delphine says
>there should be a very official, and a secret unofficial deadline.  Sj
>suggests having an early deadline for people who need advnce notice;
>Delphine said she will pay Sj a beer if anyone submits a paper early. 
>  
>
I agree to delphine. After the last office deadline comes some realy 
good papers. So we taked tham. The secrest deadline was the day where we 
was making the programm. I also think there would be mutch early 
subissions exspecialy if you say the deadline is or people who need ad. 
notice.

>Mysekurity: will papers be physical, on a wiki?  will they be editable
>/ commentable by others before the event?  Delphine notes she would
>not like that.
>  
>
I would love that. Because we sould be always a little bit more open 
(also with scientific papers) than everybody else. The realy kewl thing 
is that people who cant come to the confernece can make somment before 
and maybe get there answer. Also editing a paper would not be a problem. 
Because you can see who has editing it. What we can make is a link to 
the original version or something like that. Please make this confernece 
not like very other conferece. Alow the people to try new things, play 
with the wiki.

But what we need is a flag what can set by the author  after the 
conference that editing is over, after that the paper should be 
transfered in a non editable version. The versions can be also used to 
make some proceding.

I will be there at the next IRC meeting.

CU there

PatrickD