[Board] Re: [Foss4g2009] OSGeo AGM at FOSS4G?

[Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo)]

Thanks for thinking through this thoroughly with me guys.  I would  
still like a session in the programme where projects and/or local  
chapters get 10-15 minutes to give an update/demo of their latest  
achievements.  The previous "lightning talk" scenario I'd been using  
worked okay.. it kept things moving along but having a shorter or  
more flexible AGM meeting is preferred.

I don't mind the projects and local chapters fighting it out for  
presentation slots, but inevitably they will not all be chosen.  So  
it would really help to have some part of the programme reserved for  
OSGeo talks by those who do not make the cut - that is, these  
projects that would normally talk at the AGM.

This gives us the best of both worlds and isn't wholly unmanageable  
IF there is reasonable time/space to do it.  No, not all local  
chapters or projects would be expected to present - but I believe  
making the possibility available is important.  This way attendees  
can still pick and choose and OSGeo projects don't feel like second  
fiddle to more popular projects/concepts.

How long until programme production? After the first cut of  
presentations are chosen, I can then ask the outstanding projects if  
they'll have a speaker there.

Making sense?

Tyler

On 8-Feb-09, at 3:43 PM, Mark Leslie wrote:
> AGM 2009 - potential
> State of OSGeo			10m
> Local Chapter Reports		25-90m	[0,35] chapters
> Committee Reports		15-30m	[0,10] committees
> Software Project Reports	30-60m	[0,16] projects
> Sponsors			10m
> Open Q&A / Debate / Panel	30m
>
> There's the potential between the numbers of committees, local  
> chapters and projects to pull a day of reports.  It's unrealistic  
> to think that each chapter or committee will have something to say,  
> but we should be ready to accommodate whoever shows up.
>
> I really like Tylers idea of having the projects provide proper  
> updates during regular sessions.  This could work well for  
> committee / chapter reports as well.  If we do pull a track on the  
> 21st for this, we've got six sessions to play with.  From past  
> years we've given ~ 3minutes per project, which strikes me as  
> terribly insufficient.  If we could push to 15 minutes and pair up  
> projects I think we could cover things in a more informative and  
> useful manner.  It will also let delegates cherry-pick the projects/ 
> committees/chapters they're most interested in.  This depends, of  
> course, on who steps up to talk, and we'll need to get people  
> committed before program production.
>