<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Arnulf,<div>Thanks for the well thought out response. I'd like to wait to hear from the rest of the board before responding in detail.</div><div>Mark</div><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On Oct 27, 2011, at 2:05 AM, Arnulf Christl wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>Mark,<br>thanks for this detailed report and your thoughts. Let me answer to a<br>few points you raise and share my ideas about OSGeo's future that I have<br>nursed since our last f2f meeting in Denver. It will take some time so<br>please bear with me.<br><br>On 10/25/2011 11:54 PM, Mark Lucas wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">Just got back from the 2011 Geoint Conference in San Antonio Texas.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://geoint2011.com/">http://geoint2011.com/</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">The USGIF is the conference for geospatial intelligence in the US. This<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">year there were over 5000 attendees (138 from overseas- mostly foreign<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">military).<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">There over 250 booths and paying sponsors (> 100,000 sq ft of exhibit<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">space) . They have built this organization up to support a full time<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">staff, multiple events throughout the year, media publications etc.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://www.gotgeoint.com/">http://www.gotgeoint.com/</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">For the first time, we were able to get on the agenda with an OSS panel. <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://geointv.com/archive/geoint-2011-breakout-demonstration-of-military-relevant-open-source-geospatial-software/">http://geointv.com/archive/geoint-2011-breakout-demonstration-of-military-relevant-open-source-geospatial-software/</a><br></blockquote><br>This is great to see. Was OSGeo represented with a booth? Right now I am<br>at the OSGeo booth in Seoul at the SmartKorea event, a trade fair with<br>some 100 exhibitors from a dozen countries. The trade fair, convention<br>and conference is co-organized by the Korean Ministry of Transport and<br>others (please check for yourself - it really is a big event). The OSGeo<br>booth has been organized by Mr. Sanghee Shin and is sponsored by the<br>Korean Local Chapter [1], mainly through his company GRIDA who provide<br>know-how and consulting using Open Source software tools. Tomorrow they<br>will also hold FOSS4G Korea [2], the local chapter's annual conference<br>taking place at the same venue. It is fascinating to see so much<br>activity around OSGeo and FOSS4G here. Interest by the government,<br>academia and private sector here is building up a lot of momentum.<br><br>I also met with the organizers of the global FIG conference [3] here<br>which will take place in Malaysia in 2014. We have talked about<br>co-organizing and Open Source track with OSGeo and will also try to have<br>a booth and so on.<br><br>This is just to document that there are things going on outside of what<br>we typically see.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">Open source software is suddenly interesting because of dramatic budget<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">cuts that are planned for most of the agencies.<br></blockquote><br>...which in my opinion is always a difficult path to star from. I know -<br>this is a great chance and I do not want to downplay it, but I also<br>think that we have done a pretty good job of making a pitch for Open<br>Source explicitly *without* the focus on cost alone, but all the other<br>arguments.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">Most of the presentations are online at: <a href="http://geointv.com/">http://geointv.com/</a><br></blockquote><br>Some of the presentations were already on Twitter, great to see so much<br>positive things going on. We will have to make sure that they are<br>collected as testimonials and are readily accessible for interested<br>OSGeo members to make a pitch at other events.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">NSA and NGA both made announcements related to their focus on open<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">source software.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">As the US government shows increasing interest in open source software<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">solutions the existing contractors will try to align themselves with<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">those capabilities. <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Unfortunately, this comes at a time when the OSGeo has stepped back from<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">a core staff and is uncertain about holding annual NA conferences.<br></blockquote><br>My understanding is different. Instead, to me it seems like this will be<br>the *first* year where NA will actually "dare" to have it's own<br>conference. This is great and I am all for supporting it. If you<br>recollect I explicitly asked at the AGM whether someone would volunteer<br>to organize it and someone stood up.<br><br><blockquote type="cite"> Indeed, there almost seems to be a reluctance to focus on raising<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">revenue for the organization - instead focusing on how to allocate what<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">we have to code sprints, travel, etc. <br></blockquote><br>I think you got this wrong - nobody is saying that we should refrain<br>from collecting more funds to be able to do more. Instead (at least I<br>am) desperate to get going again and suggested to restart the Funding<br>Committee. But our set up so far did not work out to actually achieve<br>this goal which is why we changed it.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">We want to support the building of open source geospatial software. I<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">would contend that we can do more if we (the board) focus on running the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">organization more like a business.<br></blockquote><br>As Tim I disagree here. Yes, some aspects of running a business can and<br>should be applied to OSGeo but I do not think that it should become a<br>business-like operation. I see OSGeo global or international (let's<br>finally find a name for this) more like a UN like structure, ideally<br>without a big budget. In my opinion we should focus on the Local<br>Chapters to do this in whatever way is appropriate for it's cultural<br>surrounding. Again - this is something where North America has not been<br>at the front of things due to (absolutely understandable) reasons that<br>were mentioned here before. One of the most important aspects is<br>language (anything you do in English seems to compete with OSGeo Int'l)<br>but also the fact that OSGeo is incorporated in the US.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">We already do a great job on supporting development. If we add more<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">attention to business models I believe that we have a window of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">opportunity to attract sponsorship from some of the many players that<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">already support USGIF. If the US government continues to move towards<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">OSS, many contractors will want to brand themselves with an OSS<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">approach, resources, development and operational support.<br></blockquote><br>This type of thing is happening all over the world right now - but with<br>very different approaches which is a tribute to the different cultural<br>backgrounds and the big difference we can see in local markets.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">If we do not focus on this we will simply lose the opportunity to USGIF,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">MIL-OSS, OSFA, OSSI or other organizations that will aggressively step<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">forward.<br></blockquote><br>Not sure about "aggressively". I do not think this appropriate for our<br>organization. Pushing the agenda it with a clearly laid out plan and<br>potentially staff, yes. But from all that I can tell this is something<br>that the local chapter of North America (or even the US only) can an<br>should pursue best.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">In either case OSGeo projects will become a valuable resource. As I<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">mentioned before, I was able to convince RadiantBlue to make a $30k<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">investment as a platinum foss4g sponsor based on the trends we see<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">developing. I'd like to continue and expand that support, but can only<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">do that if there is a business case to be made.<br></blockquote><br>Then we will have to build a business case. But as already mentioned, I<br>don't think that it is a good idea to use OSGeo Int'l as the vehicle to<br>start this. At this level we are talking international politics - and<br>this should avoid an agenda that is too strictly national. What you<br>propose to me feels like a very national thing.<br><br>A different take could be that US based organizations make up for the<br>largest share of income for OSGeo and OSGeo then distributes this money<br>out to the world. But I can already see a lot of discussion on how this<br>is supposed to work and it will be a really slippery slope. Also taking<br>into account that the US has some inconvenient international<br>involvements like export restrictions, visa limitations and in general<br>is a high cost environment. For the money that we spent on one employee<br>in NA it would be possible to employ 5 or even 10 people from other<br>economic backgrounds. To me this makes it almost impossible to make a<br>transparent and fair business case.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">I feel that we have fallen backwards. We failed to raise sponsorship<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">and revenue in order to sustain and grow the organization. That led to<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">decision to cut expenses with the removal of the ED. I get the feeling<br></blockquote><br>No, I believe you got something wrong here. We have not fallen<br>backwards. Instead the largest chunk of sponsorship jut ran out this<br>year - as we knew all along since Autodesk started as sustaining<br>sponsor. What happened is that we did not manage to attract enough new<br>sponsors to compensate for this loss - even although we did have a full<br>time ED. Explicitly looking at funding, removing the ED position does<br>not put us in a worse position than we were in before. Continuing with<br>this position without appropriate funds would have been suicidal for the<br>foundation and irresponsible towards our employee.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">that some on the board are comfortable with the status quo. It is<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">probably clear that I'm in a different camp - we need to raise revenue,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">get back to where we can support core staff, and grow the organization<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">on a couple of fronts. A litmus test for me will be a decision on the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">annual NA conference.<br></blockquote><br>As already stated above, I am absolutely in favor of having an annual<br>North American event and will support it with a +0. I intentionally say<br>"+0" because I feel that the responsibility for this to happen - and<br>also the format of the event - lies with the northern Americas.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">I feel that this is a discussion we should quickly settle one way or the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">other and I'd appreciate any feedback in advance of the next board<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">meeting. Either way I'll continue to be a strong supporter and user of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">OSGeo projects - its just that we all need to decide where we are going<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">to focus and put our energies.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Mark<br></blockquote><br>Not sure that we can settle this quickly, but it is great to see the<br>energy to get things done.<br><br><br><br>Let me add some more random thoughts. What I have to say might not make<br>all of us comfortable - so please approach this with an open mind.<br><br>As you all know I am not happy with the current compilation of board<br>members. I highly respect and personally like you all - plus I am<br>thankful that you invest all the time needed to pursue furthering OSGeo.<br>But 7/9 directors are from northern America and native English speakers<br>and the two remaining board members are from Europe. In many aspects<br>Europe is very comparable to the US and Canada. Forgive me for lumping<br>us all in one bucket but you know where I am getting at: This is not an<br>international representation.<br><br>So I have been wondering whether we should break down the current board<br>of directors and start again from a different angle. I can see excellent<br>leadership and great ideas in the current board and believe that you<br>could perfectly well populate a North American Local Chapter - kind of a<br>meta chapter. This North American Chapter could then incorporate as a<br>not-for-profit (if they see the need), start to build it's own budget,<br>have elections, organize FOSS4G conferences, employ staff, conduct<br>training events and so on.<br><br>What do you think?<br><br>The OSGeo Int'l board of directors would then be different in that<br>members are nominated and elected by the local chapters - however this<br>can be organized... This would probably make up for a much more diverse<br>board and make OSGeo Int'l a truly global organization.<br><br><br>Best regards,<br>Arnulf.<br><br>PS:<br>This has been hacked into a flimsy netbook sitting on my knees attending<br>the United Nations GGIM. If you think I have gone nuts please feel free<br>to point this out, it may well be that I have been over politicized by<br>the last three days here... :-)<br><br>[1] <a href="http://www.osgeo.kr/">http://www.osgeo.kr/</a><br>[2] <a href="http://www.osgeo.kr/3">http://www.osgeo.kr/3</a><br><br>-- <br>President, OSGeo<br><a href="http://www.osgeo.org">http://www.osgeo.org</a><br>_______________________________________________<br>Board mailing list<br>Board@lists.osgeo.org<br>http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>