[Board] Proposed text for an OSGeo Code of Conduct

Wed Feb 4 13:49:30 PST 2015

well said, jeff.

I see Cameron's points, but Jeff's text is far closer to what I feel, than
anything proposed so far.

Just my 0.02

J

Wed Feb 04 2015 at 22:13:50 odesílatel Jeff McKenna <
jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com> napsal:

> Hi Cameron,
>
> I believe you touched on exactly what my initial draft was
> (http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php?title=Diversity&oldid=81445), custom to
> the OSGeo mission and spirit.
>
> I have already reviewed the other community docs, including the ADA
> Initiative.  What you see there on the OSGeo wiki is a simple
> straightforward statement that the OSGeo community could follow, and
> yes, it was drafted from the heart (much better than a copy/paste).
>
> I encourage the OSGeo Conference Committee to continue its discussions,
> however it is clear to me that a concise statement is needed from the
> OSGeo Board for the entire foundation, which is why I'm moving ahead
> with that, or at least trying to.
>
> Maybe you should start drafting your ideas on an OSGeo wiki page, and
> ask for others to edit, as I did.  Or if you cannot, just edit the
> existing Diversity page.
>
> However, as the Board meeting is tomorrow, at least we have something to
> start with (my experience with OSGeo is that things start happening when
> you see it written down).
>
> Talk soon,
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
> On 2015-02-04 4:31 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> > Hi Jeff, all,
> >
> > Thanks for invitation to the board meeting [1] to discuss a code of
> > conduct. Unfortunately I can't make it, my enthusiasm for OSGeo wains at
> > 2am (which is the timeslot for me). Maybe there are others who have been
> > involved in the conference email list discuss who will join in.
> >
> > So I'll add my comments in advance:
> >
> > 1. I strongly believe there should be ONLY ONE OSGeo endorsed and
> > recommended Code of Conduct / Diversity Statement. It makes it simpler
> > and hence easier to apply.
> >
> > 2. Following on from 1), other OSGeo communities should be invited to
> > contribute to the Code of Conduct / Diversity Statement. In particular,
> > the conference committee should be invited to contribute.
> >
> > 4. I suggest building on prior best practice documentation rather than
> > writing our own from scratch. Many of these prior documents have already
> > gone through multiple review cycles and it makes sense to build upon
> > that expertise. There have been a number of referenced best practice
> > documents referenced. Carl has just suggested an OGC reference which is
> > good (and built upon prior material).
> >
> > 6. There has been valuable and insightful suggestions on this topic
> > already on the conference thread. I suggest building upon those comments
> > as well.
> >
> > 5. David William Bitner valuably suggested documenting what we want to
> > achieve, then use that as a basis for writing. (see comment below). I
> > suggest what we want such a document to cover:
> >
> > * Recognise that OSGeo has a DIVERSE community
> > * Set expectation that people should act RESPECTFULLY toward each other
> > * Outline a process for RECOGNISING, REPORTING and ADDRESSING incidents
> > which can be referenced by those dealing with incidents. (Dealing with
> > incidents is often a hostile situation, and having a process to
> > reference can greatly help the people doing the hard job of mediating.)
> >
> > 6. While I like the concept of the word "Diversity", I think it is
> > currently confusing in  "Diversity Statement" as a heading. "Diversity"
> > is broad in meaning, and can mean Diversity in software choice, food
> > selection, processes followed, etc, etc. We should select a heading
> > relevant to what is being described - which is an expectation of
> > "behaviour" or "conduct".  "Code of Conduct", Principles of Conduct"
> > better describe what should be covered.
> >
> > [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2015-02-05
> >
> > On 5/02/2015 3:51 am, Carl Reed wrote:
> >> Venka et. al.
> >>
> >> You might be interested in the OGC Principals of Conduct which is
> >> itself based on the IETF Code of Conduct.
> >>
> >> http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/policies/conduct
> >>
> >> Perhaps this might be helpful.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Carl Reed
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message----- From: Venkatesh Raghavan
> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 6:03 AM
> >> To: board at lists.osgeo.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Board] Proposed text for an OSGeo Code of Conduct
> >>
> >> On 2015/02/04 21:45, Jeff McKenna wrote:
> >>> Yes I agree, which is why I believe the OSGeo Foundation needs a very
> >>> simple Diversity statement, that says everyone can expect an open and
> >>> respectful environment (see my original draft at
> >>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php?title=Diversity&oldid=81445). Notice
> >>> how there is no mention of policing etc in that version. Your
> >>> discussions on a Code of Conduct for FOSS4G are very separate in my
> >>> opinion.  In any case, the OSGeo Board will discuss this in
> >>> tomorrow's meeting if you would like to attend and share your
> >>> thoughts, all are welcome
> >>> (http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2015-02-05).
> >>
> >> I agree that any statement by OSGeo foundation in general and
> >> statements pertaining to events produced/hosted/presented by
> >> OSGeo Foundation should be kept separate.
> >>
> >> Venka
> >>>
> >>> -jeff
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 2015-02-04 6:28 AM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> >>>> I'm expanding this Code of Conduct thread to include the OSGeo Board,
> >>>> who are proposing an alternative Code of Conduct:
> >>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Diversity
> >>>>
> >>>> I strongly suggest that we should try to have only one OSGeo Code of
> >>>> Conduct / Diversity Statement as it reduces confusion and is easier to
> >>>> implement. There is beauty in simplicity. Jeff are you suggesting that
> >>>> we have two? (One for conferences, and another for OSGeo?)
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/02/2015 7:09 am, Jeff McKenna wrote:
> >>>>> I would like Board members to edit that wiki page directly over the
> >>>>> next few days, and then we can discuss this at the Board meeting on
> >>>>> Thursday.  My goal is to have a new "/diversity" page linked from the
> >>>>> main osgeo.org site.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jeff, I assume that since you have proposed an alternative text, that
> >>>> you have issue with the prior proposed text? (as in the bottom of this
> >>>> email thread). What do you see to be the limitations of the prior
> >>>> proposed text?
> >>>>
> >>>> Also, in your email, are you requesting that only board members edit
> >>>> the
> >>>> Diversity statement, or is it open to other community members to
> >>>> edit as
> >>>> well?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 4/02/2015 7:16 am, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
> >>>>> Interesting, MapZen will only sponsor events which have a strong COC
> >>>>> in place:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://mapzen.com/blog/mapzen-code-of-conduct
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>> Bart
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 25 Jan 2015, at 22:10, Cameron Shorter <
> cameron.shorter at gmail.com
> >>>>>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks Eli,
> >>>>>> I like your list of characteristics. I'd add:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * Have a CoC in the first place, which breaks down to:
> >>>>>> ** Ensure conferences remember / realise that a CoC should be in
> >>>>>> place. (Add it to our cookbook [1]  and bid process)
> >>>>>> ** Make it easy to apply a CoC by referencing an existing document.
> >>>>>> (Complete this discussion and provide a best practice document that
> >>>>>> can be referenced).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I acknowledge your point re over-doing sexualized images discussion.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I like the qgis CoC, and suggest that if we can make adding a CoC
> >>>>>> easy (by providing generic text), then we should add having a CoC a
> >>>>>> requirement for OSGeo graduation. I've added a placemarker into the
> >>>>>> proposed text for the next OSGeo Project Graduation Checklist. [2]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook
> >>>>>> [2]
> >>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Project_Graduation_Checklist#processes.4
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 26/01/2015 5:53 am, Eli Adam wrote:
> >>>>>>> Code of Conduct specific wording is less important than these
> >>>>>>> characteristics:
> >>>>>>> * Being present (i.e. not implied but clearly stated)
> >>>>>>> * Appearing sincere
> >>>>>>> * Being sincere
> >>>>>>> * Having reasonable people implementing it
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In that regard, the similar texts you listed were all fine.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Generally, I think that we are spending too much time and
> >>>>>>> emphasis on
> >>>>>>> sexualized images.  We are in the open source geospatial software,
> >>>>>>> geospatial standards, open data, education, and related fields;
> 95%+
> >>>>>>> of all presentations and other content can be done entirely
> >>>>>>> successfully without images of people at all.  For the 5% of cases
> >>>>>>> that images of people substantively contribute to the presentation,
> >>>>>>> err on the side of caution, "If in doubt, leave it out".
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I like the idea of the conference committee starting with a CoC for
> >>>>>>> conferences and the Board possibly modifying and expanding it to
> >>>>>>> other
> >>>>>>> areas of OSGeo or projects establishing their own (see QGIS,
> >>>>>>> http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/governance/
> codeofconduct/codeofconduct.html)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I don't think that 2015 FOSS4G needs any input, they already seem
> to
> >>>>>>> have it under control, http://2015.foss4g.org/about/codeofconduct/
> ,
> >>>>>>> and there was nothing about a CoC in the bid.  We should be
> focusing
> >>>>>>> 2016 and beyond.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks for working on guiding this process Cameron.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 3:12 AM, Cameron Shorter
> >>>>>>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi David,
> >>>>>>>> Thanks for starting this discussion. When you opened the
> >>>>>>>> discussion, you
> >>>>>>>> very kindly offered to help set a Code of Conduct in place. How
> >>>>>>>> do you
> >>>>>>>> suggest we move toward concluding the discussion and getting a
> >>>>>>>> Code of
> >>>>>>>> Conduct in place?
> >>>>>>>> Do you have a timeframe in mind for this? I assume we should try
> to
> >>>>>>>> make a
> >>>>>>>> CoC available for FOSS4G 2015 if they wish to make use of one?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Peter, thanks for you comments on proposed text.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Is there anyone else with an interest in influencing the final
> >>>>>>>> text? If so,
> >>>>>>>> please speak up.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Which is the better version of a CoC?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 1. Prior foss4g: https://2015.foss4g-na.org/code-conduct
> >>>>>>>> 2. OReilly: http://www.oreilly.com/conferences/code-of-conduct.
> html
> >>>>>>>> (copied
> >>>>>>>> below)
> >>>>>>>> 3. My revised version (copied below)
> >>>>>>>> 4. Something else
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 19/01/2015 9:16 am, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi David,
> >>>>>>>> I'm happy to move proposed CoC text across to a wiki. If
> requested,
> >>>>>>>> I'll
> >>>>>>>> copy across now (within 48 hours), or can wait till there has been
> >>>>>>>> further
> >>>>>>>> discussion.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Also happy to expand the discussion to other lists, although I
> >>>>>>>> expect the
> >>>>>>>> conference committee is probably the logical primary point for
> >>>>>>>> discussion,
> >>>>>>>> as a CoC is most applicable to conferences. The board would need
> to
> >>>>>>>> sign off
> >>>>>>>> on a CoC and should be invited to comment.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Re identifying what should be in a code of conduct. I've attempted
> >>>>>>>> to start
> >>>>>>>> on that in the list of items I've attempted to address, listed
> >>>>>>>> below.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I have presented the draft CoC (below), as I find it is often
> >>>>>>>> easier to
> >>>>>>>> start with a "straw man" which can be picked apart, rather than
> >>>>>>>> talking
> >>>>>>>> vaguely in conceptual levels. However, I'm not wedded to the text,
> >>>>>>>> and hope
> >>>>>>>> to see constructive criticism of the ideas, text and structure.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 19/01/2015 3:46 am, David William Bitner wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I really want to thank everyone here for engaging in this issue.
> >>>>>>>> I do
> >>>>>>>> appreciate all the different voices that have contributed to this
> >>>>>>>> conversation -- they all certainly speak to the diversity of
> >>>>>>>> thoughts and
> >>>>>>>> experiences that we already have in this community.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Cameron -- thank you very much for putting forward a first draft
> >>>>>>>> of a
> >>>>>>>> potential CoC for us to use. Before drafting and wordsmithing a
> CoC
> >>>>>>>> I want
> >>>>>>>> to step back and make sure we answer a few questions that would
> >>>>>>>> certainly
> >>>>>>>> impact how a CoC gets written. When we get to the point of
> >>>>>>>> drafting, we
> >>>>>>>> should certainly do so on the wiki (or other trackable
> >>>>>>>> collaborative medium)
> >>>>>>>> rather than in an email thread.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> With some of the wording in this draft as well as seeing the
> >>>>>>>> discussion from
> >>>>>>>> the last Board Meeting, is the conference committee the correct
> >>>>>>>> venue for
> >>>>>>>> this discussion or should this be at the Board level so that this
> >>>>>>>> applies to
> >>>>>>>> all OSGeo activities (mailing lists, events, etc)? I am certain
> >>>>>>>> that many of
> >>>>>>>> the same people would remain engaged in helping draft a Code of
> >>>>>>>> Conduct
> >>>>>>>> either for the foundation as a whole or just for our events, but
> >>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>> certainly impacts the scope and wording required in a draft.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Many of the comments that I read as against having a CoC seem to
> >>>>>>>> stem from
> >>>>>>>> people wondering what does a CoC solve. Sadly, having a CoC does
> >>>>>>>> not "solve"
> >>>>>>>> anything. There will still be issues. A CoC simply provides one
> >>>>>>>> tool for us
> >>>>>>>> to help resolve those issues when they come up as well as
> >>>>>>>> providing a
> >>>>>>>> proactive statement that we aim to be a welcoming and diverse
> >>>>>>>> community to
> >>>>>>>> hopefully prevent some of those issues in the first place. A CoC
> is
> >>>>>>>> not the
> >>>>>>>> end point of diversity initiatives, but it is a very low hanging
> >>>>>>>> fruit to
> >>>>>>>> start with. Other initiatives that I know have been tried that we
> >>>>>>>> should
> >>>>>>>> continue to look at their effectiveness include author blind
> public
> >>>>>>>> program
> >>>>>>>> review, scholarship initiatives, proactively seeking out diversity
> >>>>>>>> in key
> >>>>>>>> notes, and many more things that we haven't tried.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 18/01/2015 2:33 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Following on from this email thread, I've drafted a proposed
> >>>>>>>> Code of
> >>>>>>>> Conduct, where I've aimed to address:
> >>>>>>>> * Be concise (concise words get read more)
> >>>>>>>> * Cover key messages
> >>>>>>>> * Include an escalation process for dealing with both minor and
> >>>>>>>> major issues
> >>>>>>>> * Ensure key terms are understood (in particular reference to
> >>>>>>>> definition of
> >>>>>>>> sexualised images)
> >>>>>>>> * Couch in positive language
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>  Tickbox version:
> >>>>>>>> * I agree to act respectfully toward others in line with the OSGeo
> >>>>>>>> Code of
> >>>>>>>> Conduct.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> OSGeo Code of Conduct:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This Code of Conduct collates the collective values adopted by our
> >>>>>>>> OSGeo
> >>>>>>>> community which baselines the behaviour we do and don't support to
> >>>>>>>> ensure
> >>>>>>>> OSGeo is a safe and productive environment for all.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We invite everyone to be respectful to all, regardless of race,
> >>>>>>>> gender, age,
> >>>>>>>> sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, national
> >>>>>>>> origin,
> >>>>>>>> ethnicity, religion, or ideas. We do not tolerate harassment of
> >>>>>>>> others in
> >>>>>>>> any form. Examples of harassment include offensive comments,
> verbal
> >>>>>>>> threats
> >>>>>>>> or demands, sexualized images in public spaces, intimidation,
> >>>>>>>> stalking,
> >>>>>>>> harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of
> >>>>>>>> events, and
> >>>>>>>> unwelcome physical contact or sexual attention. [1]
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We expect all participants to follow the Code of Conduct when
> >>>>>>>> involved in
> >>>>>>>> OSGeo activities. This includes conferences, related social
> >>>>>>>> events, and
> >>>>>>>> online forums. Participants violating this Code of Conduct will be
> >>>>>>>> asked to
> >>>>>>>> desist and/or make amends. For gross or continual violations,
> >>>>>>>> offenders may
> >>>>>>>> be expelled from the event or forum without a refund, and/or
> banned
> >>>>>>>> from
> >>>>>>>> future events or other forums.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Participants are encouraged to bring any concerns to the attention
> >>>>>>>> of event
> >>>>>>>> staff, the forum, forum leader, or OSGeo Board. We thank all for
> >>>>>>>> helping
> >>>>>>>> keep OSGeo welcoming, respectful, and friendly for all.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [1] Examples of inappropriate sexualised environments are
> described
> >>>>>>>> here:
> >>>>>>>> https://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/sexual-
> harassment-code-practice-what-sexual-harassment
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 10/01/2015 9:59 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Looking around at various Conference "Codes of Conduct", I found
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> O'Reilly definition to be eloquently worded, and less
> >>>>>>>> threatening to
> >>>>>>>> potential attendees. (Although I still can't find a clear
> >>>>>>>> definition of
> >>>>>>>> "sexual images".)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> http://www.oreilly.com/conferences/code-of-conduct.html
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Code of Conduct
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> At O'Reilly, we assume that most people are intelligent and
> >>>>>>>> well-intended,
> >>>>>>>> and we're not inclined to tell people what to do. However, we want
> >>>>>>>> every
> >>>>>>>> O'Reilly conference to be a safe and productive environment for
> >>>>>>>> everyone. To
> >>>>>>>> that end, this code of conduct spells out the behavior we support
> >>>>>>>> and don't
> >>>>>>>> support at conferences. The core of our approach is this:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We don't condone harassment or offensive behavior, at our
> >>>>>>>> conference venues
> >>>>>>>> or anywhere. It's counter to our company values. More
> >>>>>>>> importantly, it's
> >>>>>>>> counter to our values as human beings.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We're voicing our strong, unequivocal support of appropriate
> >>>>>>>> behavior by all
> >>>>>>>> participants at technical events, including all O'Reilly
> >>>>>>>> conferences. We
> >>>>>>>> invite you to help us make each O'Reilly conference a place that
> is
> >>>>>>>> welcoming and respectful to all participants, regardless of race,
> >>>>>>>> gender,
> >>>>>>>> age, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, national
> >>>>>>>> origin,
> >>>>>>>> ethnicity, or religion. So that everyone can focus on the
> >>>>>>>> conference itself,
> >>>>>>>> and the great networking and community richness that happens when
> >>>>>>>> we get
> >>>>>>>> together in person, we will not tolerate harassment of conference
> >>>>>>>> participants in any form--in person or online.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Examples of harassment include offensive comments, verbal
> >>>>>>>> threats or
> >>>>>>>> demands, sexualized images in public spaces, intimidation,
> >>>>>>>> stalking,
> >>>>>>>> harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of
> >>>>>>>> sessions or
> >>>>>>>> events, and unwelcome physical contact or sexual attention.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We expect all participants--attendees, speakers, sponsors, and
> >>>>>>>> volunteers--to
> >>>>>>>> follow the Code of Conduct during the conference. This includes
> >>>>>>>> conference-related social events at off-site locations, and in
> >>>>>>>> related
> >>>>>>>> online communities and social media. Participants asked to stop
> any
> >>>>>>>> harassing behavior are expected to comply immediately. Conference
> >>>>>>>> participants violating this Code of Conduct may be expelled from
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> conference without a refund, and/or banned from future O'Reilly
> >>>>>>>> events, at
> >>>>>>>> the discretion of O'Reilly Media.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Please bring any concerns to the immediate attention of the event
> >>>>>>>> staff, or
> >>>>>>>> contact our VP of Conferences, Gina Blaber at gina at oreilly.com.
> We
> >>>>>>>> thank our
> >>>>>>>> participants for your help in keeping the event welcoming,
> >>>>>>>> respectful, and
> >>>>>>>> friendly to all participants.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Read the blog post by Tim O'Reilly that is the basis of our
> >>>>>>>> functional code
> >>>>>>>> of conduct for all O'Reilly conferences.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks to the Lean Startup folks and the jsconf.us folks, whose
> >>>>>>>> Codes of
> >>>>>>>> Conduct inspired some changes to our own.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Cameron Shorter,
> >>>>>>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
> >>>>>>>> LISAsoft
> >>>>>>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
> >>>>>>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Cameron Shorter,
> >>>>>>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
> >>>>>>>> LISAsoft
> >>>>>>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
> >>>>>>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Cameron Shorter,
> >>>>>>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
> >>>>>>>> LISAsoft
> >>>>>>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
> >>>>>>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>> Conference_dev mailing list
> >>>>>>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Cameron Shorter,
> >>>>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
> >>>>>> LISAsoft
> >>>>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
> >>>>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com <http://www.lisasoft.com>,
> F
> >>>>>> +61 2 9009 5099
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> Conference_dev mailing list
> >>>>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>>>> <mailto:Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>
> >>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150204/58488308/attachment.htm>