Tyler,<div><br></div><div>You mention "time critical decisons." Has anyone tried to delineate these?</div><div><br></div><div>Just thinking aloud, myself... the three most critical decisions are precisely "where", "when" and "how much". By precisely, I mean the exact venue, exact dates, and pricing structure. There are two major impactors on these decisions: general program structure and estimated number of attendees. If we can reasonable place upper and lower bounds on both of these impactors, we can narrow where and when.</div>
<div><br></div><div>From what I gather from the first handful of comments about the Denver proposal is that workshops are now seen as a more significant factor than when we first assembled the proposal in December 2008. At that time, there seemed to be an desire for an emphasis on the code sprint.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Fortunately, the "when" question isn't significantly impacted by workshops vs. code sprint. The conference remains a similar number of days. Neither is the "where" significantly impacted. However, the "how much" is to a great extent. The workshops can be seen as a revenue source whereas the code sprint is entirely an expense.</div>
<div><br></div><div>(FYI: that last sentence is what drove us to increase the code sprint as we originally saw the main conference as a way to help pay for a really good weekend of hacking)</div><div><br></div><div>Just some thoughts...</div>
<div><br></div><div>-Eric</div><div>-=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=-<br>Eric B. Wolf New! 720-334-7734<br>USGS Geographer<br>Center of Excellence in GIScience<br>PhD Student <br>CU-Boulder - Geography<br>
<br>GPG Public Key: <a href="http://www.h4h.net/ebwolf.public.key.txt">http://www.h4h.net/ebwolf.public.key.txt</a><br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tmitchell@osgeo.org">tmitchell@osgeo.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Just thinking out loud.. It is possible that some LOCs might see the programme<br>
as their primary task and really want to make it reflect their goals, while<br>
conference support companies take care of the many other local issues.<br>
<br>
I also wonder if the conf committee feels it has the time and ability to keep<br>
up top of these more time critical decisions.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Tyler<br>
</font><div class="im"><br>
On May 27, 2010 01:54:37 pm Cameron Shorter wrote:<br>
> foss4g committee,<br>
><br>
> At foss4g2009, there was talk that the international osgeo community<br>
> (led by the foss4g committee) should provide greater guidance on some of<br>
> the recurring themes of the conference, thus allowing to LOC to focus<br>
> more on local issues. I would have appreciated this greater guidance<br>
> when I was chair.<br>
><br>
> I still think that the LOC chair should have the final say on decisions,<br>
> we the foss4g committee should decide what our preferred position is on<br>
> items such as program, workshops, code sprints, priority items to<br>
> include in budgets, etc.<br>
><br>
> The first of these questions to come up is the program and workshops:<br>
> * I suggest that Jeff (as chair) or Eric (as foss4g chair) raise a<br>
> question for vote on these big ticket items, with Jeff making a call on<br>
> the recommendation, and Eric having final say as foss4g chair.<br>
> * These recommendations should be rolled into guidelines for future<br>
> conferences too.<br>
</div><div><div></div><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
Conference_dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>