[Board] So what is the purpose of OSGeo?

Thu May 29 10:24:50 PDT 2008

Thanks for putting me back on track. Now we are getting somewhere. I am
starting to understand.

Mind me that I am making this up along the way. Sorry if I appear
offensive. Just see me as I am. Struggling with every thought that you
throw at a poor overloaded brain that continuously has to translate back
and forth between English and German. If you give me some time to wrap my
head around it I might get what you want.

On Thu, May 29, 2008 17:52, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> I reiterate: it would be nice to see a succinct statement of opposition
> to Paul's proposal that can be argued for/against.

The commercial aspect of the proposal does not align with the character of
OSgeo (us).

Solution: There are perfect processes around to use. Use them to make the
proposal come true.

> Perhaps this good question of Arnulf's was meant to be such a statement?

Yes.

>> How can we (OSGeo) assure that we (OSGeo) apply the same vetting to
>> anybody (OSGeo members?) who approach OSGeo wanting to do the same
> thing?
>
> It is the Board's responsibility to make such decisions.  Sometimes
> there is no clear-cut decision criteria, alas, especially for ideas that
> are new and untried -- situations like this are why boards exist: to make
> such policy decisions.
>
> Three possible paths suggest themselves to me:
>
>
1- simply declare the teach-in idea inappropriate, and end the
> discussion

If I could I would Warnock it somehow, yes I would. :-)

> 2- put out a CFP for teach-ins and then choose amongst the
> respondents using a set of criteria, not unlike the annual conference
> 3-judge each teach-in proposal on a case-by-case basis

4 - (simply) apply the existing brand and trademark rules

I don't see any difference in Paul's proposal to many other business
activity that takes place every day around the world for considerable time
already without any big discussions. The only difference is that it seems
to be the first one in NA and Paul asks. There is nothing unruly in
developing a brand that is named "Teach-in". It teaches the "The OSGeo
Stack", a term that is neutral. Nor would we (OSGeo) object to its use -
always in the faith that the training will not focus on some proprietary
package only and promotes OSGeo in some way and so on. This is just
STANDARD BUSINESS.

But calling it "OSGeo Teach-in" and make it in some way appear to be an
official OSGeo event like FOSS4G or (to a lesser degree) FOSSGIS - does
not work well for me. This is what I object to.

If we want the "OSGeo Teach-in" to become a brand (Paul has already
redesigned the logo - something which I am very in favor of) - that could
be used to raise funds - then we need to design a process. (...thinking
out loud): The logo "OSGeo Teach-in" could be something you get when you
are a sponsor. Then you can do this kind of event. Whether it is good or
not - we (OSGeo) at Marketing Committee might want to design a
questionnaire for the participants and collect statistics for the success
of the "Tech-in" so that we (OSGeo) can publish it and use it to further
our brand and make it attractive to new sponsors ("OSGeo Teach-in service
providers" and governments allow their public servants to go to the FOSS4G
because there you can also get "OSGeo Teach-Ins" - the ones with the rare
exception when you can be taught by Paul Ramsey personally. One of the
most renowned figures of the Open Source Geospatial World. In a debate
with Steve Coast and the Chief Ordnance Survey Guru iof the UK - Peter ter
Haar. Thats cool marketing. Pity that we (OSGeo) don't spend more time on
building OSGeo.

> (I'd personally suggest path #3, since the idea is relatively new and
> untried; should it be successful or unsucessful, then the board can move to
> path #2 or #1, respectively, the next time such a teach-in idea comes
> around.)

This is not really new. But as I see it we are talking about two different
things. Both can be done and for both you do not have to ASK anybody:
* Create a local conference with all the community related governance
issues (a thousand lurk, a hundred talk, 10 debate and 2 do the work)
* Create a business model that intends to make a profit. When you do the
marketing plan and consider whether you want to use the OSGeo logo you
have to decide.
** Use the links to the OSGeo product pages, they are contained within
OSGeo. They are well renowned so this attracts clients.
** Become a sponsor. Then you are allowed to carry the OSGeo logo on your
web site.

> [Personal aside: I find myself frequently disagreeing with Arnulf's
> positions, but I have in the past and will continue in the future to
> support his presence here precisely because he provides such a valuable
> counterpoint to some of us -- making me at least stop and think through my
> positions.]
>
> -mpg
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Arnulf Christl [mailto:arnulf.christl at wheregroup.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 8:26 AM
>> To: Michael P. Gerlek
>> Cc: Mark Lucas; OSGeo-Board
>> Subject: Re: [Board] So what is the purpose of OSGeo?
>>
>>
>> Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
>>
>>> I too have been refraining from doing anything but listen,
>>>
>> since I'm not
>>> a Board Member, but the number and tone of emails Paul's
>> proposal has
>>> raised is surprising to me.
>>
>> My very personal experience tells me that this will give us
>> loads of problems and I am trying to slow down the discussion. The more
>> positive feedback Paul's proposal gets the more I'll have to oppose it.
>> For me this is painful
>> because I really appreciate Paul's Open Source business activities and
>> think that the teach-in proposal is great - but not as so tightly
>> connected to an OSGeo event. More over I think that neither Paul not
>> Jeff need that. I might even
>> support it from my company without having any financial return I am so
>> much in favor of making this happen. I wonder why it has developed into
>> such a problem?
>>
>>> As I understand it, a couple members-in-good-standing of
>>>
>> the Community
>>> are in good faith
>>
>> "members-in-good-standing" "good faith" and "moral blessing"
>> are completely not quantifieable and therefore not reproducible and
>> therefore not transparent categories.
>>
>> How can we (OSGeo) assure that we (OSGeo) apply the same
>> vetting to anybody (OSGeo members?) who approach OSGeo wanting to do the
>> same thing?
>>
>>> (1) trying to spread the message of the Foundation,
>>> (2) willing to assume the financial risk,
>>> (3) pay OSGeo some money, and not incidentally
>>> (4) try to make a living by promoting open source.
>>>
>>
>> I'd hate to be associated as an opposer to (4) as you will believe.
>>
>>
>> As a side note - we should really make sure what our member
>> categories are. The most recent additions I heard are "real member" and
>> "members-in-good-standing". Come off it. We have
>> participants, members and charter members. Suffice it should.
>>
>> 7
>>
>>
>>> In return, they are are asking OSGeo to provide its moral
>>>
>> blessing by
>>> allowing the use of the logo, brand, etc.
>>>
>>> There seems to be some concern that this might draw away from annual
>>> conference: okay, that is a clear tangible issue which can
>>>
>> be reasonably
>>> discussed.
>>>
>>> However, there seem to be other, larger undercurrents of
>>>
>> concern being
>>> voiced by some of the board members -- but which I'm not
>> able to readily
>>> understand.  Maybe I missed a mail somewhere along the way,
>> but it'd be
>>> nice to see a succinct statement of opposition that can be argued
>>> for/against.
>>>
>>> -mpg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: board-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> [mailto:board-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Mark Lucas
>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 4:46 AM
>>>> To: OSGeo-Board
>>>> Subject: [Board] So what is the purpose of OSGeo?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, couldn't ignore this one....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm really surprised and confused about some of the negative
>>>> reaction to Paul Ramsey's proposal to provide training for OSGeo
>> projects and
>>>> solutions.
>>>>
>>>> It is clearly a good thing in my mind.  We have several
>>>> active members of the OSGeo projects proposing to spread the word and
>>>>  provide a much needed service.  They are offering to take the risk
>>>> and
>> provide both
>>>> financial and advertising benefit to the OSGeo.
>>>>
>>>> It is in our best interest to raise the bar for all OSGeo
>>>> solutions - training is a much need part of that.  OSGeo needs to
>> participate in
>>>> these types of things to stay in the public eye and raise the
>>>> financial resources to carry on its cause.
>>>>
>>>> It is quite true that it is extremely difficult for many
>>>>
>> to justify
>>>> travel outside their own countries to the agencies or
>> organizations
>>>> they work for.  It is naive to think that we are going to change
>>>> that fact.  There is a customer need for OSGeo training all over the
>>>> world - OSGeo should be encouraging a thousand flowers to bloom.
>>>>
>> None of
>>
>>>> this happens for free.  Open source should not be confused with
>>>> 'free', it costs money and resources to do these things and
>>>> we need to encourage all of the help we can get.
>>>>
>>>> We should be putting our energy into positively encouraging our
>>>> solutions and their promotions, raising more resources for OSGeo so
>>>> we have the ability to help those in need.
>>>>
>>>> Mark,
>>>> a has been board member ;-)
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Board mailing list
>>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>

-- 
Arnulf Christl
http://arnulf.us/Blog