[Board] foss4g europe
Steven Feldman
shfeldman at gmail.com
Thu Nov 21 02:45:27 PST 2013
Hi
I have been following this discussion with a lot of interest as it covers several topics that have come up during the last year as we were planning FOSS4G 2013. My comments are offered as both a past FOSS4G chair and as a newcomer to the OSGeo who can maybe bring an outsiders view and a little commercial perspective.
I think there are 3 interlinked topics here -
OSGeo's funding needs and funding model
The relationship of regional events and the global annual FOSS4G (and implicitly the level of control/authority/guidance that OSGeo offers)
The "ownership" of the FOSS4G brand
1. OSGeo's funding needs and funding model
Inevitably there is potential for much discussion about how light or substantial an organisation OSGeo should be and what level of funding is needed to support that organisation. I am not going to go down that rabbit hole in this mail. However it is clear that even the lightest organisation will need some level of funding and if we aspire to support projects, codesprints, extend outreach or education activities and provide seed funding for new chapters and events we will need some funding.
Unless we identify a new funding model the 2 primary sources of funding will be direct donations from sponsoring organisations and the surplus generated from events. Consequently I would suggest that all events that sit under the OSGeo umbrella and either use it's branding (OSGeo or FOSS4G) or request seed funding and/or financial guarantees should be expected to contribute some of the surplus that they generate back to OSGeo.
2. The relationship of regional events and the global annual FOSS4G
Events generate a surplus largely from sponsorship. It is difficult to even break even on the costs of a venue, catering, AV and other costs from the fees charged to delegates without increasing fees to a level that will discourage attendance and conflict with our outreach objectives.
The level of sponsorship income is related to the size and profile of the audience and consequently the global FOSS4G should be the biggest draw for delegates and have the greatest potential for sponsorship income and surplus. In this regard there is some reason to argue that regional events should be timed and marketed so as not to diminish the impact of the global event.
We were concerned that FOSS4G-NA and FOSS4G-CEE might have an adverse effect on the results for FOSS4G 2013, that did not happen and delegate numbers and sponsorship income proved to be very good (we will publish our results shortly, the accounts are just being finalised).
That said there did not appear to be any grand plan on the timing and marketing of the regional events alongside the global event. If we want the global event to be a significant source of funding for our work then we need to have some process to ensure that other OSGeo regional or local events are coordinated with this in mind. Of course no one can or should prevent a group of enthusiasts from organising an event around open source geo but if that group wants to claim affiliation or endorsement from OSGeo then a precondition should be that the event is scheduled to fit in with other preplanned events (time and geography influence this).
3. The "ownership" of the FOSS4G brand
If you search for FOSS4G in your favourite search engine or on twitter you will have to dig down further than I was prepared to go to find a usage of the term that does not relate to OSGeo. We may have adopted a term or the title of an event that pre-existed the creation of OSGeo but I think that by now we can make a fair claim to FOSS4G being a brand "owned" by OSGeo. I am sure that the rest of the world considers FOSS4G to be synonymous with OSGeo. After all "Free and Open Source Software for Geo" sums up what we believe in and what we do. I strongly support the previous suggestion that we should explore the possibility of getting a trademark (or the appropriate protection) for the brand.
If the proposition that FOSS4G is a de facto brand of OSGeo is accepted then it follows that OSGeo should exercise some control (hopefully with a light touch) over how the brand is used and by whom.
4. So what do we do?
If the Board and the wider community agree with most of the above then the priority would be for the conference group to draft a framework for the coordination of the global, regional and national events, the use of the OSGeo and FOSS4G brands, the provision of seed funding and the distribution of event surpluses.
I am willing to kick that off if the board and conference team wish and if others who are more community experienced will participate.
Cheers
______
Steven
On 20 Nov 2013, at 14:28, board-request at lists.osgeo.org wrote:
> Send Board mailing list submissions to
> board at lists.osgeo.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> board-request at lists.osgeo.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> board-owner at lists.osgeo.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Board digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: foss4g europe (Jeff McKenna)
> 2. Re: foss4g europe (Bart van den Eijnden)
> 3. Re: foss4g europe (Daniel Morissette)
> 4. Re: foss4g europe (Jachym Cepicky)
>
> From: Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>
> Subject: Re: [Board] foss4g europe
> Date: 20 November 2013 13:35:03 GMT
> To: board at lists.osgeo.org
>
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I've been quiet on this, well because I come in from so many angles on
> this, and have been letting the discussion happen. However so many
> people are sending me direct private messages asking for my opinions,
> that I feel I must respond now.
>
> The FOSS4G brand is world-wide, and known much more than even the
> OSGeo brand/foundation.
>
> Several years ago I championed a push to make FOSS4G a priority for
> the foundation, and even pushed to fund a part-time position dedicated
> to the brand. The dice didn't roll my way, but what did happen was my
> mind was cleared, and I was able to step back and see FOSS4G for what
> it is: a way for local communities to get together to share their Open
> Source geospatial passion.
>
> I've moved on from that experience to now support strongly the
> formation of local events (regional FOSS4Gs), and let local organizers
> be free to create their own event, with their own vision and passion.
>
> This brings me to the topic of this email thread. I do constantly
> approve OSGeo's support for smaller events, without forcing the local
> organizers through the red tape of the Board and its formalities (yes
> this may offend some OSGeo hardliners). I have been doing so with
> Jachym offline, as well as several other future local FOSS4G events
> that are in talks right now (yes exciting, there are several in the
> works).
>
> Of course when the local event need more official support such as
> funding, well then that is a different story. And I think things are
> working well when that is required.
>
> What I do not want is for any more work/responsibilities to be put on
> the volunteers in the Conference Committee. Yes I know that all too
> well too. So if we as a Board do want to make FOSS4G a priority, and
> focus on supporting other regional events, well then we must allocate
> resources (yes open our wallets). Until that time comes, we cannot
> put any more tasks to this volunteer committee (i.e. leave them to
> manage the global FOSS4G rfp decisions).
>
> I was hoping to explain this in the upcoming Board face-to-face
> meeting, but I am fine to discuss this publicly here.
>
> Has Jachym done anything wrong? Not at all. He's trying to openly
> promote FOSS4G around Europe.
>
> Is this the first time someone was offended by a FOSS4G forming by one
> specific group? Not at all, I hear this often.
>
> We are all volunteers and we are trying our best. Jachym pulled me
> into a discussion with Marco from FOSSGIS, in Nottingham, and I was
> impressed with how open the ideas were. It is too bad that some are
> offended now.
>
> Did we offend some 10 years ago when the GRASS and MapServer
> communities were merged into the FOSS4G event? Yes, I heard similar
> concerns back then. Everyone is very careful to not lose the core
> feel of their event.
>
> I realize I am not solving anything here in my email response. But I
> hope we can all work together to let these great local/regional FOSS4G
> events continue to grow without putting too much requirements on them.
>
> Your President and friend,
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2013-11-20 5:12 AM, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:
>>
>> Just one last time, for the record: The initial stir caused by
>> FOSS4G-E was simply caused by announcing an event without involving
>> the local community. Specifically: The FOSSGIS organizers
>> (including myself) heard of FOSS4G-E for the first time when it was
>> officially announced at FOSS4G in Nottingham. That was a very bad
>> move because we are used to selecting conference venues
>> transparently. We make sure that dates do not overlap and we don't
>> cannibalize each other's attendees, etc. None of these concerns
>> were addressed publicly, hence people were angered. Simple as
>> that.
>>
>> I suggest that we make it a rule that anybody wanting to make use
>> of the brand FOSS4G must first announce this on conference dev
>> (will make this a separate motion on their list). Fur us Local
>> Chaps it is really this very first announcement which is so
>> important because then people can wrap their head around it, voice
>> their concerns, offer to help, etc.
>>
>> I hope that this clears up the confusion around FOSS4G-E 2014. We
>> will do our best to support FOSSGIS, the OSGeo day at AGIT and
>> FOSS4G-E.
>>
>> In a nutshell: Next time anything happens in Germany kindly let
>> the Local Chapter know beforehand (just like anywhere else in the
>> world).
>>
>
>
>
>
> From: Bart van den Eijnden <bartvde at osgis.nl>
> Subject: Re: [Board] foss4g europe
> Date: 20 November 2013 13:45:24 GMT
> To: Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>
> Cc: OSGeo Board <board at lists.osgeo.org>
>
>
> Hey Jeff,
>
> well said and I think I agree on all points.
>
> Best regards,
> Bart
>
> On 20 Nov 2013, at 14:35, Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I've been quiet on this, well because I come in from so many angles on
>> this, and have been letting the discussion happen. However so many
>> people are sending me direct private messages asking for my opinions,
>> that I feel I must respond now.
>>
>> The FOSS4G brand is world-wide, and known much more than even the
>> OSGeo brand/foundation.
>>
>> Several years ago I championed a push to make FOSS4G a priority for
>> the foundation, and even pushed to fund a part-time position dedicated
>> to the brand. The dice didn't roll my way, but what did happen was my
>> mind was cleared, and I was able to step back and see FOSS4G for what
>> it is: a way for local communities to get together to share their Open
>> Source geospatial passion.
>>
>> I've moved on from that experience to now support strongly the
>> formation of local events (regional FOSS4Gs), and let local organizers
>> be free to create their own event, with their own vision and passion.
>>
>> This brings me to the topic of this email thread. I do constantly
>> approve OSGeo's support for smaller events, without forcing the local
>> organizers through the red tape of the Board and its formalities (yes
>> this may offend some OSGeo hardliners). I have been doing so with
>> Jachym offline, as well as several other future local FOSS4G events
>> that are in talks right now (yes exciting, there are several in the
>> works).
>>
>> Of course when the local event need more official support such as
>> funding, well then that is a different story. And I think things are
>> working well when that is required.
>>
>> What I do not want is for any more work/responsibilities to be put on
>> the volunteers in the Conference Committee. Yes I know that all too
>> well too. So if we as a Board do want to make FOSS4G a priority, and
>> focus on supporting other regional events, well then we must allocate
>> resources (yes open our wallets). Until that time comes, we cannot
>> put any more tasks to this volunteer committee (i.e. leave them to
>> manage the global FOSS4G rfp decisions).
>>
>> I was hoping to explain this in the upcoming Board face-to-face
>> meeting, but I am fine to discuss this publicly here.
>>
>> Has Jachym done anything wrong? Not at all. He's trying to openly
>> promote FOSS4G around Europe.
>>
>> Is this the first time someone was offended by a FOSS4G forming by one
>> specific group? Not at all, I hear this often.
>>
>> We are all volunteers and we are trying our best. Jachym pulled me
>> into a discussion with Marco from FOSSGIS, in Nottingham, and I was
>> impressed with how open the ideas were. It is too bad that some are
>> offended now.
>>
>> Did we offend some 10 years ago when the GRASS and MapServer
>> communities were merged into the FOSS4G event? Yes, I heard similar
>> concerns back then. Everyone is very careful to not lose the core
>> feel of their event.
>>
>> I realize I am not solving anything here in my email response. But I
>> hope we can all work together to let these great local/regional FOSS4G
>> events continue to grow without putting too much requirements on them.
>>
>> Your President and friend,
>>
>> -jeff
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2013-11-20 5:12 AM, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:
>>>
>>> Just one last time, for the record: The initial stir caused by
>>> FOSS4G-E was simply caused by announcing an event without involving
>>> the local community. Specifically: The FOSSGIS organizers
>>> (including myself) heard of FOSS4G-E for the first time when it was
>>> officially announced at FOSS4G in Nottingham. That was a very bad
>>> move because we are used to selecting conference venues
>>> transparently. We make sure that dates do not overlap and we don't
>>> cannibalize each other's attendees, etc. None of these concerns
>>> were addressed publicly, hence people were angered. Simple as
>>> that.
>>>
>>> I suggest that we make it a rule that anybody wanting to make use
>>> of the brand FOSS4G must first announce this on conference dev
>>> (will make this a separate motion on their list). Fur us Local
>>> Chaps it is really this very first announcement which is so
>>> important because then people can wrap their head around it, voice
>>> their concerns, offer to help, etc.
>>>
>>> I hope that this clears up the confusion around FOSS4G-E 2014. We
>>> will do our best to support FOSSGIS, the OSGeo day at AGIT and
>>> FOSS4G-E.
>>>
>>> In a nutshell: Next time anything happens in Germany kindly let
>>> the Local Chapter know beforehand (just like anywhere else in the
>>> world).
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Daniel Morissette <dmorissette at mapgears.com>
> Subject: Re: [Board] foss4g europe
> Date: 20 November 2013 14:21:16 GMT
> To: board at lists.osgeo.org
>
>
> Well, when it comes to building, protecting and promoting a brand and ensuring clear relationships between organizations then I think a bit of red-tape is in order, so I disagree when one says that this is unnecesssary overhead.
>
> If we follow that logic, then why do we care to spend so much efforts with the OSGeo incubator at all? Just let any open source projects call themselves OSGeo projects without any review and be done with it. That would be o much simpler.
>
> /me steps out of the way now.
>
> Daniel
>
> On 13-11-20 8:45 AM, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
>> Hey Jeff,
>>
>> well said and I think I agree on all points.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Bart
>>
>> On 20 Nov 2013, at 14:35, Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> I've been quiet on this, well because I come in from so many angles on
>>> this, and have been letting the discussion happen. However so many
>>> people are sending me direct private messages asking for my opinions,
>>> that I feel I must respond now.
>>>
>>> The FOSS4G brand is world-wide, and known much more than even the
>>> OSGeo brand/foundation.
>>>
>>> Several years ago I championed a push to make FOSS4G a priority for
>>> the foundation, and even pushed to fund a part-time position dedicated
>>> to the brand. The dice didn't roll my way, but what did happen was my
>>> mind was cleared, and I was able to step back and see FOSS4G for what
>>> it is: a way for local communities to get together to share their Open
>>> Source geospatial passion.
>>>
>>> I've moved on from that experience to now support strongly the
>>> formation of local events (regional FOSS4Gs), and let local organizers
>>> be free to create their own event, with their own vision and passion.
>>>
>>> This brings me to the topic of this email thread. I do constantly
>>> approve OSGeo's support for smaller events, without forcing the local
>>> organizers through the red tape of the Board and its formalities (yes
>>> this may offend some OSGeo hardliners). I have been doing so with
>>> Jachym offline, as well as several other future local FOSS4G events
>>> that are in talks right now (yes exciting, there are several in the
>>> works).
>>>
>>> Of course when the local event need more official support such as
>>> funding, well then that is a different story. And I think things are
>>> working well when that is required.
>>>
>>> What I do not want is for any more work/responsibilities to be put on
>>> the volunteers in the Conference Committee. Yes I know that all too
>>> well too. So if we as a Board do want to make FOSS4G a priority, and
>>> focus on supporting other regional events, well then we must allocate
>>> resources (yes open our wallets). Until that time comes, we cannot
>>> put any more tasks to this volunteer committee (i.e. leave them to
>>> manage the global FOSS4G rfp decisions).
>>>
>>> I was hoping to explain this in the upcoming Board face-to-face
>>> meeting, but I am fine to discuss this publicly here.
>>>
>>> Has Jachym done anything wrong? Not at all. He's trying to openly
>>> promote FOSS4G around Europe.
>>>
>>> Is this the first time someone was offended by a FOSS4G forming by one
>>> specific group? Not at all, I hear this often.
>>>
>>> We are all volunteers and we are trying our best. Jachym pulled me
>>> into a discussion with Marco from FOSSGIS, in Nottingham, and I was
>>> impressed with how open the ideas were. It is too bad that some are
>>> offended now.
>>>
>>> Did we offend some 10 years ago when the GRASS and MapServer
>>> communities were merged into the FOSS4G event? Yes, I heard similar
>>> concerns back then. Everyone is very careful to not lose the core
>>> feel of their event.
>>>
>>> I realize I am not solving anything here in my email response. But I
>>> hope we can all work together to let these great local/regional FOSS4G
>>> events continue to grow without putting too much requirements on them.
>>>
>>> Your President and friend,
>>>
>>> -jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2013-11-20 5:12 AM, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Just one last time, for the record: The initial stir caused by
>>>> FOSS4G-E was simply caused by announcing an event without involving
>>>> the local community. Specifically: The FOSSGIS organizers
>>>> (including myself) heard of FOSS4G-E for the first time when it was
>>>> officially announced at FOSS4G in Nottingham. That was a very bad
>>>> move because we are used to selecting conference venues
>>>> transparently. We make sure that dates do not overlap and we don't
>>>> cannibalize each other's attendees, etc. None of these concerns
>>>> were addressed publicly, hence people were angered. Simple as
>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest that we make it a rule that anybody wanting to make use
>>>> of the brand FOSS4G must first announce this on conference dev
>>>> (will make this a separate motion on their list). Fur us Local
>>>> Chaps it is really this very first announcement which is so
>>>> important because then people can wrap their head around it, voice
>>>> their concerns, offer to help, etc.
>>>>
>>>> I hope that this clears up the confusion around FOSS4G-E 2014. We
>>>> will do our best to support FOSSGIS, the OSGeo day at AGIT and
>>>> FOSS4G-E.
>>>>
>>>> In a nutshell: Next time anything happens in Germany kindly let
>>>> the Local Chapter know beforehand (just like anywhere else in the
>>>> world).
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Morissette
> http://www.mapgears.com/
> Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Board] foss4g europe
> Date: 20 November 2013 14:28:08 GMT
> To: Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>, board at lists.osgeo.org
>
>
> Hi Jeff and others,
>
> I agree, some things should be done in more careful way in the past. I
> would say, we are all on the same track right now, working *together*
> (by "we" I mean really everybody involved in this discussion, even
> offlist), and it helped to clear things up for the future as well.
>
> Thank you for support, me personally will try (as always) to get things
> aligned with general opinion. Hard part is to find out, where the
> general opinion is, but that is our task, being open- community.
>
> I also agree with (not only) Daniel's point of view, that, since we are
> keeping the FOSS4G as well as OSGeo brands, and we all really *do* care,
> what happens to them, some (possible not too tight, but with firm knot)
> red tape should be there, since we *all* simply do care. I respect this
> (and be very thankful for open discussion and at the end collaboration,
> which is already happening).
>
> I have my homeworks now, thank you all
>
> Jachym
>
> Dne 20.11.2013 14:35, Jeff McKenna napsal(a):
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I've been quiet on this, well because I come in from so many angles on
>> this, and have been letting the discussion happen. However so many
>> people are sending me direct private messages asking for my opinions,
>> that I feel I must respond now.
>>
>> The FOSS4G brand is world-wide, and known much more than even the
>> OSGeo brand/foundation.
>>
>> Several years ago I championed a push to make FOSS4G a priority for
>> the foundation, and even pushed to fund a part-time position dedicated
>> to the brand. The dice didn't roll my way, but what did happen was my
>> mind was cleared, and I was able to step back and see FOSS4G for what
>> it is: a way for local communities to get together to share their Open
>> Source geospatial passion.
>>
>> I've moved on from that experience to now support strongly the
>> formation of local events (regional FOSS4Gs), and let local organizers
>> be free to create their own event, with their own vision and passion.
>>
>> This brings me to the topic of this email thread. I do constantly
>> approve OSGeo's support for smaller events, without forcing the local
>> organizers through the red tape of the Board and its formalities (yes
>> this may offend some OSGeo hardliners). I have been doing so with
>> Jachym offline, as well as several other future local FOSS4G events
>> that are in talks right now (yes exciting, there are several in the
>> works).
>>
>> Of course when the local event need more official support such as
>> funding, well then that is a different story. And I think things are
>> working well when that is required.
>>
>> What I do not want is for any more work/responsibilities to be put on
>> the volunteers in the Conference Committee. Yes I know that all too
>> well too. So if we as a Board do want to make FOSS4G a priority, and
>> focus on supporting other regional events, well then we must allocate
>> resources (yes open our wallets). Until that time comes, we cannot
>> put any more tasks to this volunteer committee (i.e. leave them to
>> manage the global FOSS4G rfp decisions).
>>
>> I was hoping to explain this in the upcoming Board face-to-face
>> meeting, but I am fine to discuss this publicly here.
>>
>> Has Jachym done anything wrong? Not at all. He's trying to openly
>> promote FOSS4G around Europe.
>>
>> Is this the first time someone was offended by a FOSS4G forming by one
>> specific group? Not at all, I hear this often.
>>
>> We are all volunteers and we are trying our best. Jachym pulled me
>> into a discussion with Marco from FOSSGIS, in Nottingham, and I was
>> impressed with how open the ideas were. It is too bad that some are
>> offended now.
>>
>> Did we offend some 10 years ago when the GRASS and MapServer
>> communities were merged into the FOSS4G event? Yes, I heard similar
>> concerns back then. Everyone is very careful to not lose the core
>> feel of their event.
>>
>> I realize I am not solving anything here in my email response. But I
>> hope we can all work together to let these great local/regional FOSS4G
>> events continue to grow without putting too much requirements on them.
>>
>> Your President and friend,
>>
>> -jeff
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2013-11-20 5:12 AM, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:
>>>
>>> Just one last time, for the record: The initial stir caused by
>>> FOSS4G-E was simply caused by announcing an event without involving
>>> the local community. Specifically: The FOSSGIS organizers
>>> (including myself) heard of FOSS4G-E for the first time when it was
>>> officially announced at FOSS4G in Nottingham. That was a very bad
>>> move because we are used to selecting conference venues
>>> transparently. We make sure that dates do not overlap and we don't
>>> cannibalize each other's attendees, etc. None of these concerns
>>> were addressed publicly, hence people were angered. Simple as
>>> that.
>>>
>>> I suggest that we make it a rule that anybody wanting to make use
>>> of the brand FOSS4G must first announce this on conference dev
>>> (will make this a separate motion on their list). Fur us Local
>>> Chaps it is really this very first announcement which is so
>>> important because then people can wrap their head around it, voice
>>> their concerns, offer to help, etc.
>>>
>>> I hope that this clears up the confusion around FOSS4G-E 2014. We
>>> will do our best to support FOSSGIS, the OSGeo day at AGIT and
>>> FOSS4G-E.
>>>
>>> In a nutshell: Next time anything happens in Germany kindly let
>>> the Local Chapter know beforehand (just like anywhere else in the
>>> world).
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>
> --
> Jachym Cepicky
> jachym.cepicky at gmail.com
> http://les-ejk.cz
> PGP: http://les-ejk.cz/pgp/JachymCepicky.pgp
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131121/b21158f5/attachment.htm>
More information about the Board
mailing list