[OSGeo-Conf] 2011 Discussion

Thu Apr 16 11:12:09 EDT 2009

+1 phantom vote for Peter's suggestions. Providing structure can help
foster creativity - especially knowing if you're efforts have a
snowball's chance in heck.

-Eric

-=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=-
Eric B. Wolf                          720-209-6818
USGS Geographer
Center of Excellence in GIScience
PhD Student
CU-Boulder - Geography


On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Peter Batty <peter at ebatty.com> wrote:
> I don't have a vote either, but on reflection and looking at all the input
> so far I think I would support option A, with a planned rotation of Europe,
> North America, Other every three years. I agree with the observations that
> having a planned rotation would make it a lot easier for local conference
> organizers to make plans. This together with some of the suggestions for
> OSGeo providing some support to local conferences would help a lot I think.
>
> I support all of Gavin's comments. And I liked Dave M's suggestion that the
> EOI process should have scope to open it up again if nobody submits a
> proposal of sufficient quality (this would be the exception rather than the
> rule, but the timing should be set up to allow this if necessary). Overall I
> don't think it makes sense to be too wishy-washy about the geographic
> rotation (allowing for exceptions etc), since this diminishes a lot of the
> benefit in terms of people being able to plan (either for organizing local
> conferences or planning a bid for the global one). I think we should just
> decide it is Europe, North America, Other, unless there are some really
> exceptional circumstances to force a change to this in a given year.
>
> Lastly, and I think this can be treated as an independent issue, but I do
> still think there is an important question that needs to be resolved in
> terms of what OSGeo is really aiming for FOSS4G to be in future. As I've
> talked about previously, there are two quite conflicting demands on it - one
> to be more "developer friendly" - small, informal, inexpensive, etc, and one
> to be a "sales venue" for OSGeo, to reach out to new users of open source -
> which calls for it to be larger, more "professional" and "commercial", etc.
> Maybe you can just leave this as a challenge for bidders to address, but
> again I think it would be good to have a little more guidance from the
> conference committee. One possible solution might be to have "back to back"
> events addressing both aims (maybe with some overlap) so that the contingent
> that is interested in both aspects can easily attend both (say a couple of
> days focused more on outreach and a couple of days focused more on deep
> technical stuff). You could do things in parallel too, but that makes it a
> little harder to address concerns about atmosphere, type of venue, etc.
>
> Anyway, I don't want to distract the main discussion onto that right now,
> but I do think that it's worth some more thought on how to handle that
> before the next call for expressions of interest (or whatever it will be
> called!) goes out.
>
> Cheers,
>     Peter.
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:46 AM, Daniel Morissette
> <dmorissette at mapgears.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't have a vote but just wanted to add that I like Gavin's suggestions
>> for handling/branding the regional events in parallel with the international
>> one.
>>
>> I'd add one rule to the <regional conference policy>: In order to get
>> OSGeo support, the date of the local conference should be at least 4 months
>> away from the international FOSS4G. This is so that people who want to
>> attend both can do so more easily.
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>> Gavin Fleming wrote:
>>>
>>> I vote for [A]
>>>
>>> Some comments that I guess should have gone onto the wiki a while ago:
>>>
>>> The annual international conference is the flagship and has a unique
>>> role including taking the message global and being the main meeting of
>>> the tribes. The interaction of the core 'FOSS4G heads' that follow it
>>> every year no matter where and the regional folk who are close enough to
>>> attend, keeps it fresh, interesting and full of pleasant surprises. So
>>> it's important to keep that going with all OSGeo's weight behind it.
>>> Definitely include the expression of interest phase. I like the idea of
>>> a NA-Europe-Other rotation but as a philosophy only. So, state it up
>>> front in the RFP but if no EOIs come from the intended region or a
>>> really compelling one comes from another region, be open to variations.
>>> Let the EOI process reveal our implicit biases if you will.
>>> As a special case for 2011 (and possibly beyond), I think it would be
>>> only fair to invite previously unsuccessful yet high quality contenders
>>> to submit EOIs. If they're then invited to do a full bid most of the
>>> homework is done.
>>> Definitely encourage and support regional or language-based conferences,
>>> i.e. following the pattern of the Local Chapters. I think OSGeo needs to
>>> develop a policy somewhat like this:
>>> <regional conference policy>
>>>
>>> OSGeo will endorse and support one conference per year per local
>>> chapter, to be called 'FOSS4G <local chapter name> <year>' and be
>>> considered an official OSGeo event, bearing the OSGeo logo, etc.
>>> One exception: The country that is hosting the International FOSS4G
>>> conference won't qualify for any official regional FOSS4G conferences in
>>> the same year.
>>>
>>> It is completely up to the local chapters to make these events happen if
>>> they so wish.
>>>
>>> The conference has to meet these simple criteria:
>>> <list of simple conditions tbd>
>>>
>>> OSGeo will provide support in the form of ....
>>>
>>> OSGeo may choose to send a member of the conference committee.
>>>
>>> The conference must be advertised widely and be open to anyone (i.e. not
>>> restricted to the Local Chapter).
>>>
>>> Existing regional conferences with different names (e.g. German FOSSGIS
>>> and Italian GFOSS?) can get the regional OSGeo FOSS4G stamp if they or
>>> the local chapter so wish and they meet the criteria.
>>> </regional conference policy>
>>>
>>> General comments:
>>> Define what is meant by OSGeo support at regional and international
>>> levels and be consistent with that. E.g. the RFP stated that OSGeo would
>>> provide bridging funds yet we could not access these for 2008 and would
>>> not have managed our cash flow without the local support of GISSA. And
>>> what other forms of support are available or envisaged? Website, wiki
>>> etc.
>>> Tighten up the RFP and make the EOI and final selection processes more
>>> transparent.
>>>
>>> Make a decision about conference website hosting and software and stick
>>> with it and support it wholeheartedly. I feel 2008 was a bit of guinea
>>> pig with OCS and it seems like 2009 has moved to yet another home grown
>>> solution(s), which makes our aim of consistency and guranteed long term
>>> availability of conference outputs difficult.
>>> Move the RFP process even earlier again so we have AT LEAST two years
>>> lead time for the international FOSS4G and set a few milestones to
>>> ensure the LOC is on track an using that time properly, such as budget
>>> approval, securing sponsorship, etc.
>>>
>>> Consider alternatives (such as the second-in-line bidder) as a
>>> contingency if the winner doesn't meet major deadlines or suffers a
>>> disaster. A real-life example is the last minute move of the massive
>>> Indian Cricket IPL (http://www.iplt20.com) to South Africa with three
>>> weeks notice (The decision was made on 23 March and it's starting on
>>> Saturday) because it clashed with Indian elections.
>>> Gavin
>>> This message is intended for the addressee only. Information and
>>> attachments in this e-mail may contain confidential, proprietary, or legally
>>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, or
>>> responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, any
>>> disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken is prohibited and may
>>> be unlawful, and could result in a claim against you.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Morissette
>> http://www.mapgears.com/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Batty - President, Spatial Networking
> W: +1 303 339 0957  M: +1 720 346 3954
> Blog: http://geothought.blogspot.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>