IRC Discussion Log: Dec 8 #foss4g2007

[Paul Ramsey]

[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <jmckenna> I have a little agenda written.  but 
maybe everyone should at least say their full names.     jeff mckenna 
here (i see some new faces)
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <markusN> so should I call in?
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <pramsey> Paul Ramsey
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <adoyle> Allan Doyle
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <pona> Claude Philipona
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] -->| FrankW 
(n=warmerda at ip-209-172-33-142.reverse.privatedns.com) has joined #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <badard> Thierry Badard
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <Venka> Venka
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <markusN> Markus Neteler
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <seven> Arnulf
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <FrankW> Frank Warmerdam
[12/8/2006 8:06 AM] <mapslob> steve lime
[12/8/2006 8:07 AM] * seven is Arnulf Christl
[12/8/2006 8:07 AM] <jmckenna> ahhh i see.   here is the little agenda:
[12/8/2006 8:07 AM] <jmckenna> 1. Go through RFP requirements for each 
proposal
[12/8/2006 8:07 AM] <jmckenna> 2. Committee selection discussion
[12/8/2006 8:07 AM] <jmckenna> 3. Next steps for 2007
[12/8/2006 8:07 AM] <jmckenna> 4. Plan for 2008 RFP release
[12/8/2006 8:08 AM] <jmckenna> sufficient?
[12/8/2006 8:08 AM] <pona> I have an announcement to osgeo
[12/8/2006 8:09 AM] <pona> FOSS4G2006 will give baxk to osgeo conference 
comittee between 4000 to 5000 USD
[12/8/2006 8:09 AM] <mapslob> $400 a piece, cool!
[12/8/2006 8:10 AM] -->| mloskot 
(n=mloskot at chello062179032088.chello.pl) has joined #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:10 AM] <FrankW> Pona: Sweet!  I'm especially glad you 
didn't end up in the red after the incredible job you folks did!
[12/8/2006 8:10 AM] <jmckenna> excellent pona
[12/8/2006 8:10 AM] <badard> wow, cool !
[12/8/2006 8:10 AM] <adoyle> definitely a +1
[12/8/2006 8:10 AM] <Venka> Thanks Pona
[12/8/2006 8:11 AM] <pona> I hope this money will stay for conference 
and promotion stuff around conference or to start a fund in case of red 
in a conference
[12/8/2006 8:12 AM] <FrankW> pona:  I'm sure there is no problem with 
this remaining earmarked to support the 2007 conference.
[12/8/2006 8:12 AM] <jmckenna> we'll make sure of that pona.
[12/8/2006 8:13 AM] <pona> ok
[12/8/2006 8:14 AM] <jmckenna> for the record here is the listed 
evaluation criteria:
[12/8/2006 8:14 AM] <jmckenna> 1. A sense of local capabilities 
(manpower, experience, commitment) to pull off the conference.
[12/8/2006 8:14 AM] <jmckenna> 2. Suitability of the hosting facilities 
for meetings.
[12/8/2006 8:14 AM] <jmckenna> 3. Ability to host several workshops at 
the same time.
[12/8/2006 8:14 AM] <jmckenna> 4. How many people could be hosted? 
Hopefully at least in the order of 750, more is an asset.
[12/8/2006 8:14 AM] <jmckenna> 5. Availability of a variety and quantity 
of accommodation (some cheap accommodation is
[12/8/2006 8:14 AM] <jmckenna> desirable!).
[12/8/2006 8:14 AM] <jmckenna> 6. Reasonable access to an international 
airport.
[12/8/2006 8:15 AM] <jmckenna> 7. Cost for attendees. We hope to keep 
cost per participant under $600 USD for the conference
[12/8/2006 8:15 AM] <jmckenna> and workshops. We also desire some 
reasonably priced accommodation and, ideally, reasonable
[12/8/2006 8:15 AM] <jmckenna> travel costs for most attendees.
[12/8/2006 8:15 AM] <jmckenna> 8. Interestingness of meeting locale. It 
is also desirable for the conference to move around.
[12/8/2006 8:15 AM] <jmckenna> 9. Involvement by the various sector 
types (local committee should include private and public
[12/8/2006 8:15 AM] <jmckenna> sector interests).
[12/8/2006 8:15 AM] <jmckenna> so let's start with #1
[12/8/2006 8:15 AM] <seven> both fair
[12/8/2006 8:16 AM] <FrankW> I'd be comfortable with either proposal, 
but I do think the professional help in Victoria is an asset for 
criteria #1.
[12/8/2006 8:16 AM] <mapslob> i agree
[12/8/2006 8:17 AM] <pona> I agree, but considering point 7 (price) it 
is difficult to go in one edition from 300 to around 600
[12/8/2006 8:18 AM] <pona> It is clear that with more money on ca have 
more professionnal organization
[12/8/2006 8:18 AM] <seven> we have only specified "below 600". Is less 
an asset?
[12/8/2006 8:18 AM] <FrankW> Well, I think we have to consider that at 
point 7, but price is the obvious cost of professional support.
[12/8/2006 8:19 AM] <mapslob> it's not clear that the portland numbers 
cover all costs (to me anyway)
[12/8/2006 8:19 AM] <FrankW> BTW, is Percy or Aaron here to speak on 
behalf of the Porland proposal?  I was a bit late.
[12/8/2006 8:19 AM] <pona> what i'm saying is that it is tow different 
philosophy, not really comparable
[12/8/2006 8:19 AM] <FrankW> err - Portland.
[12/8/2006 8:19 AM] <pramsey> Drop them an email now, FrankW, it's 8am 
here on PST, so they may just be getting into work.
[12/8/2006 8:19 AM] <FrankW> I had meant to invite them but forgot.
[12/8/2006 8:20 AM] -->| macalaga (n=chatzill at gw.dmsolutions.ca) has 
joined #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:20 AM] <pramsey> phonetic, I like it
[12/8/2006 8:20 AM] <macalaga> hi guys - sorry I'm late.
[12/8/2006 8:20 AM] <jmckenna> mistake on my part - i assumed this was 
an internal committee meeting.  sorry about that
[12/8/2006 8:20 AM] <mapslob> would be nice to see an equivalent budget 
to the one paul provided
[12/8/2006 8:20 AM] <markusN> FrankW: please tell them about 
http://irc.telascience.org/ to connect easily to IRC if needed
[12/8/2006 8:21 AM] <FrankW> jmckenna:  Well, I think it would be an 
asset to have them here to answer questions.
[12/8/2006 8:21 AM] <markusN> heck, this channel will be missing there
[12/8/2006 8:21 AM] <jmckenna> yes i agree
[12/8/2006 8:22 AM] <adoyle> Maybe we should generate a list of 
questions and give the proposers a chance to respond. Unless there's a 
clear-cut winner already. I thought they were both pretty good and the 
major differentiator seemed to be cost per attendee
[12/8/2006 8:22 AM] <jmckenna> adoyle:  exactly what i thought this would be
[12/8/2006 8:22 AM] <pramsey> adoyle, I disagree.
[12/8/2006 8:22 AM] <pramsey> :)
[12/8/2006 8:23 AM] <pramsey> If that was true, then the decision would 
be easy.
[12/8/2006 8:23 AM] -->| racicot 
(n=chatzill at dsl-209-166-85-189.whidbey.net) has joined #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:23 AM] <adoyle> no, the decision is hard because both 
groups seem good.
[12/8/2006 8:23 AM] <FrankW> well, I don't think the Portland proposal's 
estimated costs quite realistic.  Lots of items like cost of catering 
and internet weren't factored in too carefully.
[12/8/2006 8:23 AM] <mapslob> hey aaron
[12/8/2006 8:23 AM] <racicot> Morning... Aaron Racicot here from the 
Portland crew.
[12/8/2006 8:23 AM] <FrankW> So I doubt the final per-person cost will 
be so different.
[12/8/2006 8:24 AM] <FrankW> racicot:  cool, thanks for coming!
[12/8/2006 8:24 AM] <adoyle> so then it's even harder to decide.
[12/8/2006 8:24 AM] <macalaga> there's also no formal relationship with 
an event organizer -- which with a growing conference in my mind is a 
huge difference
[12/8/2006 8:24 AM] <racicot> Yes, Huge difference in cost!
[12/8/2006 8:25 AM] <mapslob> ~12%
[12/8/2006 8:25 AM] <racicot> We plan to hook up with an organizer, but 
not until we have a better handle on the up front work to cut down on cost.
[12/8/2006 8:25 AM] <jmckenna> can we move to eval point#2?
[12/8/2006 8:25 AM] <jmckenna> 2. Suitability of the hosting facilities 
for meetings.
[12/8/2006 8:25 AM] <adoyle> I have to say, my heart lies with the 
grass-roots. But as the conf gets bigger that's a harder sell
[12/8/2006 8:26 AM] <FrankW> For point 2 I think both conference centers 
are more than adequate facilities.
[12/8/2006 8:26 AM] <pona> the wifi /internet conneciont is a really 
important point to consider
[12/8/2006 8:26 AM] <racicot> I do believe that the Victoria proposal is 
almost twice as expensive (user cost) as it needs to be.  It is a big 
diferentiator.
[12/8/2006 8:26 AM] <mapslob> how about for workshops
[12/8/2006 8:26 AM] <jmckenna> (point 3)
[12/8/2006 8:27 AM] <pona> I think the nomber of computer for workshop 
are a little too low if consider a growing conference
[12/8/2006 8:27 AM] <jmckenna> overlap, no problem sorry
[12/8/2006 8:27 AM] <jmckenna> pona: for victoria i agree
[12/8/2006 8:27 AM] <badard> I agree with Claude
[12/8/2006 8:27 AM] <pramsey> We are not going to run all the workshops 
on one day.
[12/8/2006 8:27 AM] -->| nhv (n=chatzill at dsl0-1.cape.com) has joined 
#foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:27 AM] <racicot> We have proposed hooking up with a local 
group (freegeek.org) to supply recycled computers for the labs.
[12/8/2006 8:27 AM] <pramsey> We are going to run them throughout the 
conference, so the number of seat days can remain the same or even 
slightly grow.
[12/8/2006 8:28 AM] <badard> And workshops during the conferences does 
not appear as a good idea for me
[12/8/2006 8:28 AM] <Venka> 1:30am in Japan. Sorry, I have to sleep. 
Hope the best side wins the FOSS4G2007 bid.
[12/8/2006 8:28 AM] <pramsey> Then you are basically saying that all 
future conferences must be at universities.
[12/8/2006 8:28 AM] <racicot> We think that they can provide machines 
that fit the criteria at a fraction of the cost.
[12/8/2006 8:28 AM] <Venka> bye
[12/8/2006 8:28 AM] <--| Venka has left #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:28 AM] <pona> considering the price again , I thinl the 
price for workshop can more easily be stronlgy higher than 2006 and 
offer more professionnal workshop
[12/8/2006 8:29 AM] * seven is leaving broadcasting range. I vote a firm 
+1 for Vancouver. Its the one meeting of the tribes, so cost is 
secondary (look who is talking!). I support Portland but suggest that it 
would be more the kind of local group meeting which in the US would be 
rather large anyway. So a 0 for Portland from me, if there needs to be a 
vote. Sorry, I am off now.
[12/8/2006 8:29 AM] <jmckenna> seven: got your vote, thanks
[12/8/2006 8:29 AM] <FrankW> I would agree that workshops are not so 
cost sensitive.  I don't mind charging extra for them for better 
facilities, etc.
[12/8/2006 8:30 AM] -->| mlucas_ 
(n=mlucas at rrcs-67-78-243-153.se.biz.rr.com) has joined #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:30 AM] <pona> I think it should be more 70-90 than 50 computer
[12/8/2006 8:30 AM] <FrankW> I have concerns about the Victoria approach 
but I think having all the workshops in the same day or two will be 
increasingly hard so we need to think flexibily.
[12/8/2006 8:31 AM] <racicot> We are flexible ;-)
[12/8/2006 8:31 AM] <FrankW> Also with reference to having people use 
their own laptops to some extent.
[12/8/2006 8:31 AM] <macalaga> I'm trying to understand why having 
workshops throughout the event is a bad thing -- can someone explain the 
reasoning?
[12/8/2006 8:31 AM] <pramsey> I have resisted going offsite, because I 
feel it makes things harder to organize. We do have access to labs at 
uVic now, but I think the effort / reward gong offsite gets to a bad 
equation.
[12/8/2006 8:32 AM] <macalaga> pramsey: agreed -- from our experience of 
being quite spread out, it's a lot more difficult, and that was all at 
one site at the university
[12/8/2006 8:33 AM] <jmckenna> people don't want to have to miss 
conference talks to participate in a workshop (only my opinion).  i 
should say i think they would 'prefer' not to miss talks
[12/8/2006 8:33 AM] <pramsey> I have done come-as-you-are workshops at 
more standard conferences (GeoTec, GeoAlberta) and it's worked fine.
[12/8/2006 8:34 AM] <adoyle> geographic spread is not good, I agree. 
Time overlap is also difficult but is unavoidable. The issue with 
workshops is you're committing to a 3-6 hour time block so can't bpo 
around to see the odd presentation
[12/8/2006 8:34 AM] <macalaga> well, inevitably there will be overlap -- 
either more talks coinciding, or workshops and talks coinciding, but I 
can understand it.
[12/8/2006 8:34 AM] <adoyle> s/bpo/bop/
[12/8/2006 8:35 AM] <jmckenna> racicot: am i correc that portland may 
involve 3 different locations (PCC, PSU, NCC) ?
[12/8/2006 8:36 AM] <racicot> Not for the conference and workshops.  We 
have proposed to do it all at the convention center, although we do have 
access to other spaces like you mentioned for other activities (social 
even etc if we choose),
[12/8/2006 8:36 AM] <FrankW> pramsey:  would you be willing to consider 
a workshops all in 1-2 days approach if we select Victoria?  That is, is 
your bid contingent on stickying with your "through the week" plan for 
workshops?
[12/8/2006 8:36 AM] <racicot> We initially were thinking the labs at 
PSU, but we agree that all at one site is better.
[12/8/2006 8:37 AM] <pramsey> The only thing sticky is the number of 
computers available.  We have booked the whole centre, so we have enough 
rooms to do the schedule in pretty much any configuratoin.
[12/8/2006 8:37 AM] <pramsey> So, yeah, if a number of the workshops are 
come-as-you-are, then we can compress them into a single day.
[12/8/2006 8:37 AM] <jmckenna> racicot: ok, understood (it seems to be a 
little hike from PSU to the convention centre by foot)
[12/8/2006 8:38 AM] <FrankW> ok - so I think we will need to discuss 
workshop structuring some more, but there is some flexibility.
[12/8/2006 8:38 AM] <FrankW> Wit hthe understanding that the Victoria 
crew isn't offering a means of coming up withmany workshop computers.
[12/8/2006 8:38 AM] -->| Schuyler (n=sderle at tridity.org) has joined 
#foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:38 AM] * Schuyler waves
[12/8/2006 8:38 AM] <racicot> Yes it is a "hike" but the public transit 
in Portland is top notch!
[12/8/2006 8:38 AM] <pramsey> Better than Lausanne? :) that's a high bar.
[12/8/2006 8:39 AM] <pramsey> God that train was cool.
[12/8/2006 8:39 AM] <FrankW> Actually, I mean discuss workshop 
structuring some more *at a later date*.
[12/8/2006 8:39 AM] <racicot> We are proposing a new and inovative way 
of comming up with that many computers... and people can even take one 
home ;-)
[12/8/2006 8:39 AM] <FrankW> I do like the Portland idea for supplying 
computers. :-)
[12/8/2006 8:39 AM] <jmckenna> racicot: that freegeek idea does sound 
interesting
[12/8/2006 8:40 AM] <racicot> It can be done and I think the community 
(FOSS4G community) would support the idea.
[12/8/2006 8:40 AM] <pramsey> An interested experiment.
[12/8/2006 8:41 AM] -->| percyd 
(n=chatzill at c-67-171-155-26.hsd1.or.comcast.net) has joined #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:42 AM] <racicot> Remember what this conference is about... 
it is a user/developer conference, not a vendor trade show.  There will 
be plenty of room for vendor and company show and tell, but lets think 
about what the attendees want...
[12/8/2006 8:42 AM] <percyd> Hi all, just got invited in. I have to go 
drop my daughter off at school right now, be back in 20 minutes. Any 
very fast question I can answer in the next two minutes? :-)
[12/8/2006 8:43 AM] <jmckenna> eval #4. How many people could be hosted? 
Hopefully at least in the order of 750, more is an asset.
[12/8/2006 8:43 AM] <percyd> easily 750
[12/8/2006 8:43 AM] <FrankW> percyd:  racicot is covering things for 
now, thanks.
[12/8/2006 8:43 AM] <racicot> Hi Percy, I am here embarassing our group 
all by my self!
[12/8/2006 8:43 AM] <percyd> cool, I'll check back in 20 minutes!!!
[12/8/2006 8:44 AM] <FrankW> I think both sites can handle the load and 
have room for extra growth if needed.  Are there any concerns on this point?
[12/8/2006 8:44 AM] -->| ssmith (n=samo at mail.refractions.net) has joined 
#foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:44 AM] <mapslob> nope
[12/8/2006 8:44 AM] <badard> no, it is ok for me !
[12/8/2006 8:44 AM] -->| bitner 
(n=bitner at c-75-73-62-228.hsd1.mn.comcast.net) has joined #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 8:45 AM] <jmckenna> portland's convention centre is much 
larger, victoria is smaller but good size for size..only things i noted 
for hosting size
[12/8/2006 8:45 AM] <racicot> Remember, Portland hosts OSCON and the 
convention center has experience dealing with the needs of an Open 
Source conference.  They know how to cater to the geeks.
[12/8/2006 8:45 AM] <jmckenna> good size for this i mean
[12/8/2006 8:45 AM] <pramsey> VCC tells me up to 1200 is NP.
[12/8/2006 8:45 AM] <mapslob> any connection with the OSCON folks and 
the portland folks?
[12/8/2006 8:45 AM] <FrankW> OK, well that still gives us lots of growth 
room.
[12/8/2006 8:46 AM] <pramsey> What are the fees for OSCON again? :)
[12/8/2006 8:46 AM] <pramsey> Catering to geeks or anybody costs money. 
Or blood. Your call.
[12/8/2006 8:47 AM] <racicot> We have mainly been in contact with the 
folks at the convention center who set up OSCON, but we do know Nat T. 
from OSCON who set it up the last few years.  We plan to work with him 
if we get selected.
[12/8/2006 8:47 AM] <racicot> Well if you where there with OSGeo it was 
free ;-)
[12/8/2006 8:47 AM] <jmckenna> eval 5. Availability of a variety and 
quantity of accommodation
[12/8/2006 8:48 AM] |<-- seven has left us.freenode.net (Read error: 110 
(Connection timed out))
[12/8/2006 8:48 AM] <mapslob> fine for both i think
[12/8/2006 8:48 AM] <jmckenna> fine for both.  but victoria bid nicely 
outlines accomadation options
[12/8/2006 8:49 AM] <badard> I agree with Jeff !
[12/8/2006 8:49 AM] <FrankW> I do kind of miss the "dorm option" for 
those operating cheaply, though both seem to have reasonably priced options.
[12/8/2006 8:49 AM] <racicot> Portland has AWSOME public transit.  From 
the time you arrive at the airport you will be able to take train, bus, 
trally everywhere.
[12/8/2006 8:49 AM] <pramsey> We're in the school year. Dorms have 
students in them.
[12/8/2006 8:49 AM] <FrankW> Agreed ... perhaps one reason to aim for 
summer in 2008.
[12/8/2006 8:49 AM] <pramsey> If we did it in the summer, we would flip 
the problem around. Lots of dorm, but the hotels become extortionate.
[12/8/2006 8:50 AM] <FrankW> Well, I don't think it is an option for 
this year anyways, so no point fixating on it.
[12/8/2006 8:50 AM] <racicot> I have an extra couple of rooms at my 
place ;-)
[12/8/2006 8:51 AM] <racicot> There are lots of options for things like 
student exchanges to hook up local students with students traveling in...
[12/8/2006 8:51 AM] <jmckenna> eval 6. Reasonable access to an 
international airport.
[12/8/2006 8:52 AM] <mapslob> ok 4 both
[12/8/2006 8:52 AM] <nhv> are prices shown for Victoria  Canadian $ ?
[12/8/2006 8:52 AM] <pramsey> Hotels yes. Registration no.
[12/8/2006 8:53 AM] <pramsey> I can provide a very detailed budget to 
committee members.
[12/8/2006 8:54 AM] <jmckenna> eval 7. Cost for attendees. We hope to 
keep cost per participant under $600 USD for the conference
[12/8/2006 8:55 AM] <jmckenna> (we may have covered that already)
[12/8/2006 8:55 AM] <jmckenna> but for the record, i got this from both 
proposals:
[12/8/2006 8:55 AM] <jmckenna> Portland - $300 US per
[12/8/2006 8:55 AM] <jmckenna> Victoria - $575 US per
[12/8/2006 8:55 AM] <mapslob> lower is better but i can't compare the 
two, not suffient detail
[12/8/2006 8:55 AM] <mapslob> from portland that is...
[12/8/2006 8:56 AM] <racicot> We believe that $575 is to high and cost 
prohibitive to this community.
[12/8/2006 8:56 AM] <FrankW> While the Portland price is likely to end 
up cheaper than Victoria by a bit, I think it is currently not a 
detailed financial analysis.
[12/8/2006 8:56 AM] <pona> with such fees I don't think we will have a 
big increase in number of attendees, probably a decreas and not so many 
people from abroad
[12/8/2006 8:56 AM] <pramsey> You're kidding, right?
[12/8/2006 8:56 AM] <FrankW> and so I am personally guessing it will end 
up higher.
[12/8/2006 8:56 AM] <pramsey> International flight + hotel + meals >>> fees
[12/8/2006 8:56 AM] <FrankW> (higher than 375)
[12/8/2006 8:56 AM] <mapslob> correct
[12/8/2006 8:57 AM] <bitner> I would guess it would take away more of 
the nearby attendees than the far away
[12/8/2006 8:57 AM] <mapslob> might loose nearby folks/students though
[12/8/2006 8:57 AM] <pramsey> And something we are going to do, is do 
direct mail to our local region to bring in more folks from the 
non-believer community.
[12/8/2006 8:57 AM] <pramsey> We need to stop talking to ourselves so much.
[12/8/2006 8:57 AM] <mapslob> what about student fees, are there other 
fee levels planned?
[12/8/2006 8:57 AM] <jmckenna> do both bids plan for a student rate?
[12/8/2006 8:57 AM] <FrankW> The 600 includes workshops right?  It is 
noticably less without workshops, and I would like to see us offer a 
more modest student rate.
[12/8/2006 8:57 AM] <macalaga> good incentive for the local folks to 
volunteer .. if the fees are much less or nothing
[12/8/2006 8:57 AM] <jmckenna> ha
[12/8/2006 8:58 AM] <pramsey> We can do a student rate, that's not a 
problem.
[12/8/2006 8:58 AM] <pona> with 300, we had already so many demad for 
special fare... i can't imagine with 600, Most demand were comming from 
abroad
[12/8/2006 8:58 AM] <markusN> (>400 is prohibitive in my opinion to many 
folks)
[12/8/2006 8:58 AM] <FrankW> I don't think 600 including workshops is 
bad at all.
[12/8/2006 8:58 AM] <markusN> *for
[12/8/2006 8:58 AM] <pramsey> Every $100 costs $50K, thereabouts.
[12/8/2006 8:58 AM] <pramsey> We add $50K to sponsorships, we can drop 
by $100.
[12/8/2006 8:58 AM] <FrankW> markusN:  Wow, where are they staying, how 
are they getting there?
[12/8/2006 8:58 AM] <jmckenna> student rate was very popular for OSGIS 
and FOSS/GRASS '04
[12/8/2006 8:59 AM] <pramsey> We strip $50K out of the banquet, we can 
drop by $100.
[12/8/2006 8:59 AM] <markusN> FrankW: ?
[12/8/2006 8:59 AM] <badard> If Victoria is selected, is it possible to 
ask them for instance to increase sponsorship and then reduce the 
regitration cost ?
[12/8/2006 8:59 AM] * markusN is maybe out of sync
[12/8/2006 8:59 AM] <FrankW> ask them to?
[12/8/2006 8:59 AM] <pramsey> Yes, badard, but budgeting a 50% increase 
in sponsorship is a risk element we would want osgeo to help work with.
[12/8/2006 8:59 AM] <FrankW> We collectively will work to come up with 
sponsors for the conference, and the better we do the lower the rate.
[12/8/2006 9:00 AM] <pramsey> I think it is achievable, but I don't want 
the conference enough to bet my own money on it.
[12/8/2006 9:00 AM] <FrankW> all "per person" prices are contingent on 
how successful we are attracting sponsors, and the bidders can only 
guess at how that will go.
[12/8/2006 9:00 AM] <pona> will adsk continue with sponsorhip?
[12/8/2006 9:00 AM] <racicot> Who has put up the money so far?
[12/8/2006 9:00 AM] <FrankW> pona:  I imagine, but possibly not as rich.
[12/8/2006 9:00 AM] <pramsey> So far the local committee has carried all 
the risk.
[12/8/2006 9:01 AM] <badard> to be more aggressive on sponsorship or 
provincial/federal grants ... in order to reduce the registration fees ? 
But I know it is not easy
[12/8/2006 9:01 AM] <pramsey> And good on them. But we're running out of 
martyrs.
[12/8/2006 9:01 AM] <pona> We a  lot of late registration. I think the 
price price should strongly increase for late registration at least 
+50%, and keep the early registration low
[12/8/2006 9:01 AM] <racicot> We have not spent anything to date... just 
evenings typing away!
[12/8/2006 9:01 AM] <pramsey> That is what our organizer recommended 
too, pona
[12/8/2006 9:02 AM] <pona> we can even imagine to have a 3 time slots rate
[12/8/2006 9:02 AM] <FrankW> I don't believe either proposer is offering 
to throw in a lot of guaranteed money so we can consider sponsorship our 
collective job, and no need to factor it in.
[12/8/2006 9:02 AM] <FrankW> But both proposals are using professional 
conference centers with some locked in stuff (like internet, catering) 
and so they have a somewhat similar "cost base" which we can analyse.
[12/8/2006 9:03 AM] <pramsey> Right. Don't feed your delegates. Big savings.
[12/8/2006 9:03 AM] <pramsey> In conference center land, the cokes cost $3.
[12/8/2006 9:04 AM] <FrankW> I noticed that ... ug!
[12/8/2006 9:04 AM] <racicot> Yep, that was our quote as well ;-)
[12/8/2006 9:04 AM] <jmckenna> eval 8. Interestingness of meeting 
locale. It is also desirable for the conference to move around.
[12/8/2006 9:04 AM] -->| jlivni 
(n=jlivni at dsl081-161-197.sea1.dsl.speakeasy.net) has joined #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 9:04 AM] <mapslob> would love to visit both areas...
[12/8/2006 9:05 AM] <pramsey> People from from Portland to Victoria for 
a vacation. Not so much, the other way around. :)
[12/8/2006 9:05 AM] <FrankW> lol
[12/8/2006 9:05 AM] <racicot> Yep, and they do it for the ferry ride ;-)
[12/8/2006 9:05 AM] <racicot> Just kidding!  I love Victoria!
[12/8/2006 9:05 AM] <pona> Victoria will probably be more attractive for 
european and people abroad
[12/8/2006 9:06 AM] <jmckenna> path so far: US-CAN-Thailand-US-Switzerland
[12/8/2006 9:06 AM] <FrankW> It sounds like we are on to 
"interestingness of meeting locale".
[12/8/2006 9:06 AM] <markusN> Italy first in 2002 :-)
[12/8/2006 9:07 AM] <jmckenna> ahh yes
[12/8/2006 9:07 AM] <markusN> Bangkok 2004
[12/8/2006 9:07 AM] <markusN> merge of tribes moreover
[12/8/2006 9:07 AM] <FrankW> Well, neither locale can compete with 
something like New Jersey or Detroit, but both are pretty good. :-)
[12/8/2006 9:07 AM] <jmckenna> (i said that) :)
[12/8/2006 9:07 AM] <jmckenna> any opinions on another north american 
conference?
[12/8/2006 9:08 AM] <jmckenna> i mean, not that we have any other choice ha
[12/8/2006 9:08 AM] <FrankW> It isn't like there is a non-NA option on 
the table.
[12/8/2006 9:08 AM] <jmckenna> i just wanted to see if anyone has 
opinions anyway, no problem
[12/8/2006 9:09 AM] <pona> I hoped there would a proposal from southa 
america or Asia but...
[12/8/2006 9:09 AM] <FrankW> I think we can expect it for 2008 (likely 
from both).
[12/8/2006 9:09 AM] <FrankW> That year will likely be a devil of a job 
to do site selection.
[12/8/2006 9:10 AM] <jmckenna> (geez you're saying everything that i try 
to write ha)
[12/8/2006 9:10 AM] <jmckenna> :)
[12/8/2006 9:10 AM] <FrankW> :-)
[12/8/2006 9:10 AM] <jmckenna> eval 9. Involvement by the various sector 
types (local committee should include private and public
[12/8/2006 9:10 AM] <jmckenna> sector interests).
[12/8/2006 9:11 AM] <jmckenna> both bids have wide representation
[12/8/2006 9:11 AM] <FrankW> Right - I think they are both good in this 
regard.
[12/8/2006 9:11 AM] <mapslob> including osgeo for victoria... ;-)
[12/8/2006 9:11 AM] <FrankW> :-)
[12/8/2006 9:12 AM] <FrankW> I think tyler is representing himself there.
[12/8/2006 9:12 AM] <mapslob> i know, couldn't resist
[12/8/2006 9:13 AM] <jmckenna> if so then their committee page should be 
changed, for future references
[12/8/2006 9:13 AM] <FrankW> Well, it becomes irrelevant after site 
selection.
[12/8/2006 9:13 AM] <pramsey> It's what he does.
[12/8/2006 9:13 AM] <jmckenna> i think
[12/8/2006 9:14 AM] <FrankW> jmckenna:  ok, what's next?
[12/8/2006 9:14 AM] <jmckenna> 2. Committee selection discussion
[12/8/2006 9:15 AM] <jmckenna> 3. Next steps for 2007
[12/8/2006 9:15 AM] <jmckenna> 4. Plan for 2008 RFP release
[12/8/2006 9:15 AM] <jmckenna> really to vote, or not
[12/8/2006 9:15 AM] <FrankW> I would suggest we drop discussion of 2008 
from this meeting ... already pretty long.
[12/8/2006 9:15 AM] <jmckenna> ok
[12/8/2006 9:16 AM] -->| kanhaiya_kk (n=kanha at 203.187.220.100) has 
joined #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 9:16 AM] <kanhaiya_kk> hi all
[12/8/2006 9:16 AM] <pramsey> I am disappointed that so few committee 
members have bothered to ask for the detailed budget.
[12/8/2006 9:16 AM] |<-- ssmith has left us.freenode.net (Read error: 
113 (No route to host))
[12/8/2006 9:16 AM] <mapslob> i think the budget was very helpful
[12/8/2006 9:16 AM] <pramsey> We have been very careful about our 
planning, and do not have a lot of grey areas. We know where our events 
will be and what they will cost, all of them.
[12/8/2006 9:16 AM] <mapslob> show's you've done the homework
[12/8/2006 9:16 AM] <jmckenna> the detail is appreciated
[12/8/2006 9:16 AM] <pramsey> Which is why I disputed adoyle's assertion 
that both proposals were "the same".
[12/8/2006 9:17 AM] <mapslob> i wish the same detail existed for 
portland- hard to compare otherwise
[12/8/2006 9:17 AM] <pramsey> I think ours is superior. We have thought 
it out more, and are taking fewer leaps of faith. We know what the trade 
offs are in terms of dollars and effort.
[12/8/2006 9:17 AM] * adoyle is not a detail-oriented person, these days 
- not enough time
[12/8/2006 9:17 AM] <mapslob> for example, in portland, how much will 
food and beverage cost? didn't see it
[12/8/2006 9:18 AM] <pramsey> I think the reason there is any contest is 
precisely because you ahve to balance out the superior planning and care 
we have taken so far agianst hte price.
[12/8/2006 9:18 AM] <pramsey> How much risk are you willing to absorb?
[12/8/2006 9:18 AM] <mapslob> was about 1/2 cost per person in mpls
[12/8/2006 9:18 AM] <FrankW> mapslob:  Right because you weren't locked 
into a high priced venue and the corresponding services.
[12/8/2006 9:18 AM] <pramsey> And what kind of event do you want?
[12/8/2006 9:19 AM] <FrankW> jmckenna:  What did you mean by "Committee 
selection discussion"?
[12/8/2006 9:19 AM] <pramsey> We can guarantee a solid professional 
event. Guarantee. It'll look good to sponsors, and good to delegates of 
all stripes.
[12/8/2006 9:19 AM] <jmckenna> FrankW: basically last chance to discuss 
points (what is happening now).  once this dies down it is time to 
decide on the voting process
[12/8/2006 9:20 AM] <FrankW> OK, so it's "site selection discussion". 
Got it.
[12/8/2006 9:20 AM] <pramsey> It will be "more corporate" than a 
volunteer event. We can offer a student rate, but I am not aiming for a 
"student conference".  I am aiming for something closer to OSCON, which 
is a solid hacker/corporate mix.
[12/8/2006 9:20 AM] <percyd> Hi all, just got back, if there are numbers 
you'd crunched WRT to food and other details we'd be happy to provide. 
Might be too late ;-)
[12/8/2006 9:20 AM] <pramsey> And has a price tag to match.
[12/8/2006 9:21 AM] <pramsey> I have given the parameters around moving 
our price, and can talk more about that with the committee, but our 
stated price is the "all things being equal" conservative price to give 
a guaranteed good conference at a certain level of quality.
[12/8/2006 9:22 AM] <FrankW> My summary position is that I'm more 
comfortable that the Victoria bid team can handle this size conference 
smoothly.  And I don't think final costs will end up all that different. 
  The main distinction being that victoria has the addon for 
professional organizers.  I'm just a bit leery about the workshop 
situation - but it will be a challenge at either site.
[12/8/2006 9:22 AM] <jmckenna> percyd: what do you see as the conference 
foxus?  (corporate/developer/hacker/user/all) ?
[12/8/2006 9:22 AM] <racicot> We proposed 30% total cost toward 
conference food and 25% for social event.  That is alot of money and I 
think we can do it.  $82,500 for crumpets and tea, $68,750 for dinne and 
the band.
[12/8/2006 9:22 AM] <jmckenna> focus, i meant
[12/8/2006 9:23 AM] <racicot> The main focus in the users and developers 
and community.  Keep it grass roots and keep it real.
[12/8/2006 9:23 AM] <pramsey> That's one perspective.
[12/8/2006 9:23 AM] <percyd> jmckenna: sort of a mix, like OSCON... I'd 
see a lot of local involvement from students and NGOs...
[12/8/2006 9:23 AM] <pramsey> OSCON is full of corporate sponsors and 
folks flying in from all over north america. It does not have a low 
price tag.
[12/8/2006 9:24 AM] <adoyle> I think this comes back to seven's meeting 
of the tribes vs a "local" event. Trouble is, there are several ways to 
have the tribes meet.
[12/8/2006 9:24 AM] <racicot> Yes, but the vendors and sponsors come 
because it is community focused.
[12/8/2006 9:24 AM] <percyd> pramsey: I don't remember the cost as I was 
on the OGEO dole :-)
[12/8/2006 9:24 AM] <adoyle> They can meet in a polished setting and do 
marketing to outsiders, or they can get together and get some work done
[12/8/2006 9:24 AM] <pramsey> I do remember, because I paid my way.
[12/8/2006 9:25 AM] <pramsey> Or they can do both adoyle.
[12/8/2006 9:25 AM] <racicot> Orielly is in it to make money... we are not
[12/8/2006 9:25 AM] <pramsey> If you want to sit and a room and hack, 
you can do that for about 10% of the cost.
[12/8/2006 9:25 AM] <adoyle> Not sure about that, pramsey
[12/8/2006 9:25 AM] <pramsey> That is not apparently the tradition.
[12/8/2006 9:25 AM] <percyd> pramsey: So, how much was it, approximately
[12/8/2006 9:25 AM] <jmckenna> i don't see how victoria and portland 
differ wrt meeting of the tribes (it's easy to argue with arnulf when he 
is not around)
[12/8/2006 9:26 AM] <racicot> I remember the full deal for Where and 
OSGEO where around $1500 each.  Again, it is a business for Orielly.
[12/8/2006 9:27 AM] <percyd> BTW, I looked into cheaper venues and we 
mentioned them in the proposal, but to go to SIZE you are talking, you 
really do end up needing a professional convention center, and you get 
the costs associated
[12/8/2006 9:27 AM] <FrankW> I personally don't see the Victoria bid as 
being more corporately oriented if that is the implication of some.
[12/8/2006 9:28 AM] <FrankW> percyd:  right - short of a big university 
being willing to roll out the red carpet.
[12/8/2006 9:29 AM] <pona>  I can easily imagine fees going to 600 USD 
but I think it is a big of step in one year going from 300 to 600
[12/8/2006 9:30 AM] <pona> but I also see Victoria a little bit ahead
[12/8/2006 9:30 AM] <racicot> Can Victoria explain the increase in cost? 
  Why 50% per person?
[12/8/2006 9:30 AM] <percyd> Frankw: Yes, and it's possible that PSU, 
with the help of the other sponsors could pull something like that off. 
It's in bewteen sessions right then. It would take a few days to pull a 
bid together that went in that direction, and I'm at a conference all 
week, so it doesn't fit in your timeline...
[12/8/2006 9:30 AM] <pona> It could be nice to work on the budget to see 
if the can be drop down by 100 USD or so or
[12/8/2006 9:31 AM] <percyd> frankw: I meant at a conference all NEXT 
week...
[12/8/2006 9:31 AM] <FrankW> I'm sure if we reduce catering and hustle 
for sponsorships that could be doable.
[12/8/2006 9:32 AM] <pramsey> racicot
[12/8/2006 9:32 AM] -->| ssmith (n=samo at mail.refractions.net) has joined 
#foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 9:32 AM] <pramsey> $100 == professional organizer
[12/8/2006 9:32 AM] <FrankW> I'm hopeful that association with OSGeo 
will make it somewhat easier to get sponsors involved.
[12/8/2006 9:32 AM] <pona> I will soon have to leave. Should we vote 
today or wait beginning of next week?
[12/8/2006 9:32 AM] <pramsey> $100 == conference center AV staff (I am 
not sure whether this number comes down, but it's a conservative estimate)
[12/8/2006 9:33 AM] <pramsey> $100 = sundry (larger marketing budget, 
mailouts, etc).
[12/8/2006 9:33 AM] <mapslob> gotta run, let me know if time to vote, or 
if you need specific questions...
[12/8/2006 9:33 AM] <pona> pramsey: yes 100 is professionnal organizer, 
but 300 + 100 + 100 = 500 and if you find 5% reduction you get the 100 cut
[12/8/2006 9:33 AM] <--| mapslob has left #foss4g2007
[12/8/2006 9:33 AM] <percyd> we typically use student to handle AV 
that's -$100 :-)
[12/8/2006 9:34 AM] <jmckenna> since both parties were here, i propose 
that we go ahead with the voting today (remembering to base your vote 
solely on the eval criteria)  And we must thank both parties for 
excellent proposals, done in such a short time
[12/8/2006 9:34 AM] <jmckenna> (or are too many people having to leave now?)
[12/8/2006 9:34 AM] <pramsey> right, percyd, they have experience 
setting up 20x20 screens at the end of a conference all with projectors 
and audio to go along with that?
[12/8/2006 9:34 AM] <racicot> We are supportive of the committees 
desision either way.  It is in our region either way and we will be 
involved either way.  We do feel there are "better" ways to do it than 
just through money at the problem.  We hope if anything our influence 
will help drive Victoria to keep costs in check.
[12/8/2006 9:34 AM] <FrankW> I would like to propose that we go to an 
email vote to ensure everyone gets a bit of time to think, and participate.
[12/8/2006 9:34 AM] <FrankW> We are missing a number of people.
[12/8/2006 9:35 AM] <jmckenna> ok
[12/8/2006 9:35 AM] <FrankW> Perhaps with the intent that all votes 
should be in by end of day Monday or so?
[12/8/2006 9:35 AM] <bitner> did anyone log this chat so that folks can 
review this discussion?
[12/8/2006 9:35 AM] <pramsey> I have it.
[12/8/2006 9:36 AM] <racicot> We truely believe we can provide the best 
conference in Portland.  Thanks for the consideration.
[12/8/2006 9:36 AM] <jmckenna> ok, i was thinking by the end of 
Wednesday then, the 13th
[12/8/2006 9:36 AM] <pona> ok
[12/8/2006 9:36 AM] <percyd> our delight! looking forward to a great 
conference!
[12/8/2006 9:36 AM] <FrankW> Do you think people need a long time to 
vote?   I wasn't anticipating a great deal more conversation.
[12/8/2006 9:37 AM] <percyd> Oh did I mention we were going to book a 
Rush tribute band for the party? :-)
[12/8/2006 9:37 AM] <FrankW> lol
[12/8/2006 9:37 AM] <jmckenna> (haaaaa)
[12/8/2006 9:37 AM] <pramsey> pona, I think we can take $100 out of hte 
budget by squeezing our banquet budget, then adding the dollars back in 
if we beat estimate elsewhere.
[12/8/2006 9:38 AM] <pramsey> But htat's something osgeo has to have a 
word in on: would a simpler banquet be acceptable? I budgetted to be 
like yours.
[12/8/2006 9:38 AM] <pramsey> Because if we squeeze and we don't get 
savings then the end result is a much leaner event.
[12/8/2006 9:38 AM] <FrankW> I think scaling back social events/catering 
to keep prices reasonable is quite acceptable.
[12/8/2006 9:38 AM] <pramsey> I also think that $150K is doable for 
sponsorships, but I will not carry that extra risk personally.
[12/8/2006 9:39 AM] <pona> it depends on adsk participation I think
[12/8/2006 9:39 AM] <pramsey> If osgeo can step up to both of those 
items, then we can be at something in the $400US range instead.
[12/8/2006 9:40 AM] <FrankW> Note, OSGeo intends for the conference to 
be revenue neutral withregard to the foundation.
[12/8/2006 9:40 AM] <FrankW> Though it is willing to assume some 
financial risk.
[12/8/2006 9:40 AM] <pramsey> Right. The trouble is you set yoru prices 
before you know your attendance :)
[12/8/2006 9:40 AM] <pramsey> roll them dice :)
[12/8/2006 9:41 AM] <percyd> I think if we keep the price low, we'll 
make up for it in volume
[12/8/2006 9:41 AM] <pona> yes in July we were quite in red .... i 
remember not sleeping well at that time...
[12/8/2006 9:42 AM] <FrankW> pona:  Right, my objective is not to put 
the local organizations in that risk position in the future.
[12/8/2006 9:43 AM] <FrankW> jmckenna:  so shall we vote by email, 
finished by Wednesday?
[12/8/2006 9:43 AM] <jmckenna> I still want to give people until the 
13th to vote, yes
[12/8/2006 9:43 AM] <FrankW> Public vote, private vote?
[12/8/2006 9:44 AM] <pona> ok i'll have to leave now
[12/8/2006 9:44 AM] <FrankW> Any thoughts folks?
[12/8/2006 9:44 AM] <pona> public is fine
[12/8/2006 9:45 AM] <pona> but only by the registred committee members
[12/8/2006 9:45 AM] <percyd> What's the protocol here, are we allowed to 
send more detailed budget numbers to the dev list?
[12/8/2006 9:45 AM] <FrankW> Agreed.
[12/8/2006 9:46 AM] <FrankW> percyd:  I think you could, though there 
isn't much time left to assemble them before people start voting.
[12/8/2006 9:46 AM] <jmckenna> i find it hard to publicly vote against 
someone
[12/8/2006 9:46 AM] <jmckenna> but i will
[12/8/2006 9:46 AM] <pramsey> then publicly vote *for* someone else :)
[12/8/2006 9:46 AM] <pramsey> Accentuate the positive, eliminate the 
negative.
[12/8/2006 9:46 AM] <pramsey> Isn't that your motto? :)
[12/8/2006 9:46 AM] <FrankW> you are voting against, you are voting for! 
  Seriously, I think they are both acceptable bids, it's just picking 
the best.
[12/8/2006 9:47 AM] <FrankW> Err "You *aren't* voting against"
[12/8/2006 9:47 AM] <percyd> Pramsey: Don't mess with Mr "in between"!
[12/8/2006 9:47 AM] <jmckenna> k. then i am ok with public
[12/8/2006 9:47 AM] <badard> yes, we have just to remember that both 
proposals are very good ! So, I am k for public.
[12/8/2006 9:49 AM] <markusN> have to go - bye
[12/8/2006 9:49 AM] <jmckenna> thanks for coming everyone
[12/8/2006 9:49 AM] |<-- markusN has left us.freenode.net ("Chatzilla 
0.9.77 [Firefox 2.0/2006101022]")
[12/8/2006 9:49 AM] <racicot> Thanks for the invite!  Adios.
[12/8/2006 9:50 AM] <--| racicot has left #foss4g2007