[Board] 2012 FOSS4G Decision

[Venkatesh Raghavan]

I agree wholly agree with what has been said by Tim and Jo.
As an organization OSGeo must learn and evolve to be

a) sustainable without making the FOSS4G event as its
main source of revenue.

b) learn to live and work with people and communities that
have their own native language.

c) realize that FOSS4G is a community event and not a
for-profit venture.

The gracious hosts of FOSS4G2012 are quite capable of handling
the events. Yes, the conference maybe different from the ones
that we had but doing things in a little differently is the whole point.

It is also premature to talk about extra budget allocations without even
having started a conversation with the LoC. BTW, I also notice
that there is no mention of "veto" powers in the OSGeo by-laws.

Venka

On 2011/09/15 5:49, Jo Cook wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I agree with Tim and Tyler.  Furthermore, I don't think it's fair to
> conflate this decision with the decision not to support the code sprint.
> Those of us that were unsure were not complaining about the money per se,
> but had a lack of knowledge of the financial implications, differing ideas
> about risk, and about whether the organisation should profit from helping
> out. This is a totally different issue, and to me (new, naive, uninformed)
> objecting on the grounds that have been stated here looks like a total lack
> of confidence in the conference organising committee.
>
> Are we really a global organisation, or do we just say that? So far, we've
> tiptoed around the English-speaking and European edges, whereas now we have
> a chance to be truly international. Are we really going to chicken out
> because of language barriers or because it's a long way to travel?
>
> Finally, please don't have a lack of confidence in the board when this
> incarnation has only been around for a few weeks!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jo
>
> On 14 September 2011 21:36, Tim Sutton<tim at linfiniti.com>  wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> (with apologies to anti-top-posters)
>>
>> As a bystander to the list and non board member I hope its ok to add
>> my 2c to the discussion. I think Arnulf raises some interesting points
>> but I do wonder if pure (or even predominantly) financial
>> considerations should be the decider for where FOSS4G conferences get
>> held.
>>
>> "To support the development of open source Geospatial Software, and
>> promote its widespread use."[1]
>>
>> I am not sure if this is the current and final version of OSGEO's
>> mission statement, but it is certainly the way I and many others
>> perceive its role. I appreciate that money is probably the grease that
>> keeps the cogs of the machine turning, but holding FOSS4G in disparate
>> locations around the world certainly takes the organisation a long way
>> to achieving its mission. My personal experience from the Cape Town
>> FOSS4G is that it played a huge role in exposing (and prompting use
>> of) FOSSGIS software to an audience that would otherwise still be
>> oblivious to it. I suspect a conference in China would have a similar
>> effect there and build strong interest and participation from a region
>> which as you have pointed out probably could use some stimulus.
>>
>> Of course it doesn't help if holding the conference there sends OSGEO
>> to the scrap yard, but if it can be done without breaking the bank, go
>> for it!
>>
>> All the best
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> [1]
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Mission#What_the_Mission_Statement_looks_like_Today
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Tyler Mitchell<tmitchell at osgeo.org>
>> wrote:
>>> On 2011-09-14, at 6:42 AM, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ideally this money comes
>>>> right back with the conference - but we will have to back it up as a
>>>> foundation with a vote - now!
>>> Arnulf,
>>>
>>> The financial discussions usually happen when the board approves
>>> the final FOSS4G budget later on, right?  Selecting the venue does not
>> mean
>>> approving the final budget, so there will be time for building in
>> changes.
>>> The vote only has to be a confirmation of the conference committee's bid
>> selection.
>>> Regardless of our current financial situation (or the proposed
>> expenditures),
>>> I'm concerned to see financial commitments, new job positions, FOSS4G
>> planning...
>>> all being hastily mixed into this vote.
>>>
>>> Even though they are often fine ideas at the end of the day, this
>> impulsive and
>>> spontaneous approach to financial planning and decision making doesn't
>>> help us plan for the future or to build a stable strategy.  Ultimately, I
>> think this
>>> decision making approach is crippling to the organisation in the long
>> run.
>>> I'm glad you will have a chance for (almost all of you) to iron out some
>> of these
>>> kinks later in the week.
>>>
>>> Tyler_______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Tim Sutton - QGIS Project Steering Committee Member (Release  Manager)
>> ==============================================
>> Visit http://linfiniti.com to find out about:
>>   * QGIS programming services
>>   * Mapserver and PostGIS based hosting plans
>>   * FOSS Consulting Services
>> Skype: timlinux Irc: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net
>> ==============================================
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20110915/6cb5185b/attachment.htm>