[Board] 2012 FOSS4G Decision

Thu Sep 15 10:22:31 PDT 2011

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Venka,
first off thank you for being patient with me and answering in a neutral
and constructive way. I can imagine that my vote must have made you
furious and I very much appreciate your contribution in resolving this.

I am not going to prevent FOSS4G from happening in Beijing in 2012 - but
I felt the only way to get heard and to get things moving was by making
a massive statement - and this seems to have worked out. Find more
concrete answers inline.

On 09/15/2011 01:49 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:
> 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.

This is absolutely true. But as it stands it is the most important
revenue generator OSGeo has. So if you (or anyone else) can help us to
change this you are more than welcome. We are working on it - but we are
not there yet.

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

You know that this is one of my primary interests in OSGeo and has been
since we started.

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

I am not sure about this. Years ago this was true but FOSS4G has
changed. FOSS4G currently is our best brand, like it ornot. There are
many other events which have a much more community-oriented character.
These originate in the OSGeo local chapters and manifest as conferences,
most prominently your very Japanese annual FOSS4G in Osaka and Tokyo,
code sprints like the annual Bolsena, NA-events, bi-monthly LinuxHotel
hack sprints, etc.).

> The gracious hosts of FOSS4G2012 are quite capable of handling
> the events. 

Thank you for this confirmation - coming from you who I know and trust
personally makes me much more comfortable with the choice of Beijing.
But can you also solidly confirm that it will not be a financially lossy
event - like, if you reread the doubts I voiced in my mail? Are we going
to attract more than 500 paying attendees out of China locally - and
this is just to cover costs, not making a plus.

> Yes, the conference maybe different from the ones
> that we had but doing things in a little differently is the whole point.

I am with you.

> It is also premature to talk about extra budget allocations without even
> having started a conversation with the LoC. BTW, 

If there are options to allocate the 20k necessary to have Jeff help out
of local Chinese funds that would be a great help. Again - maybe you can
help here?

> I also notice
> that there is no mention of "veto" powers in the OSGeo by-laws.

We have the traditional voting system of -1 (blocking things) which has
to be supported by arguments (which I did). voting 0  means I don't know
/ care. Voting +0 means I support the motion but cannot / want to get
personally involved. Voting +1 means I actively support this motion.

I could not actively support this motion without getting my issues
resolved. Call it as you like, if my vote is not taken as a veto I will
have to step down - no harm done. I cannot go with a 0 or +0 because
failing to meet the financial needs will put OSGeo in a precarious
budget position, so it would only be careless. We are about to confirm
spending several 100k for an event without having the funding to
actually back it up, not with my private account and less so with OSGeo's.

Several people have talked to me here on the venue about the Beijing
conference (sorry that you are not here) and some of my doubts could be
reduced. So I will probably change my vote to a +1 (because a -0 is not
really an option with a decision this important). But all the same I
still would like to get some more responses and ideas on this public
list to feel better backed up.

Thank you,
Arnulf.

> 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
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

- -- 
Making sense with your spatial data
http://www.metaspatial.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk5yNFcACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b29VQCfdFEMqw22iS5Z+3bgNw3s+DTz
nFwAn23+6IHkwpz+O1W6eRh9HT8vmNwH
=JsWg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----