[OSGeo-Conf] Re: Motion Regarding FOSS4G-CEE Name

[Volker Mische]

Hi,

thanks Vasile for the detailed explanation. I talked with Jachym a bit
about the FOSS4G-CEE when we were waiting for our flights in Denver. And
for the reasons you mention below, I was always in favour of the
FOSS4G-CEE as it is a true local/regional event for me. I can't be
compared to a FOSS4G-NorthAmerica which would me more than a local scale.

Cheers,
  Volker

On 10/13/2011 10:20 AM, Vasile Craciunescu wrote:h
> I'd like to comment some more on FOSS4G-CEE and why the impact on global
> FOSS4G will be minor (at least in the following years).
> 
> We are targeting an geographic/cultural/economic area with few
> participants to the global FOSS4G conference (only 5 attendees to
> Denver). This is mainly due to: a) high price of participation to the
> global FOSS4G; b) Lack of a strong FOSS4G community. In my opinion,
> FOSS4G-CEE should:
> 
> * Keep the cost of participation as low as possible. We can do this by
> organizing the event in partnership with universities and use their
> facilities for the conference/practical workshops. We can still make
> some revenue for OSGeo.
> * Focus on students. The CEE FOSS4G community should be constructed from
> the bottom.
> * Present as many FOSS4G case studies/success stories as possible. We
> need to convince the participants that FOSS4G software is capable to
> resolve their needs, from simple tasks to complex projects as the
> national SDIs.
> * Invite a fair number of FOSS4G/OSGeo leaders and charismatic
> characters. Our young community needs to be inspired and find some
> models to follow.
> * Bring in national/european actors involved in INSPIRE
> 
> My two cents,
> Vasile
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/11/11 11:22 PM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:
>> Thank you all for making this decision. It was very important not only
>> for us to know, where we can go. I would be happy with any result, just
>> to know where the pitch lines are, this result is of course the better
>> one at the moment.
>>
>> I'm following the discussion in other threads carefully and so far I can
>> only tell, the topics you are rising are very interesting and I can see
>> so far positives and negatives as you do.
>>
>> Speaking about franchising of FOSS4G trade mark, and getting some budget
>> out of all regional "FOSS4G"-named conferences. The prise should be set,
>> so that the event itself could still be made low cost, with reasonable
>> budget.
>>
>> Remember: FOSS4G-CEE should be during spring, so that the FOSS4G-Global
>> would not be affected directly with this event. We are actually going
>> directly against Czech traditional Geoinformatics, which will have to
>> find it's new role (or not, depends...). I think, if what ever FOSS4G-*
>> would take place during spring, the impact on the global event will be
>> much lower.
>>
>> I still see as an option, approach the world championship way: every
>> second year global event, every other year bigger local events.
>>
>> Jachym
>>
>> On 11.10.2011 00:10, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Frank Warmerdam<warmerdam at pobox.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Motion: The OSGeo Conference Committee on behalf of OSGeo
>>>> declares that it has no objection to the name FOSS4G-CEE being
>>>> used for an open source geospatial conference in central and eastern
>>>> europe organized by a group including Karel Charvat and Jachym
>>>> Cepicky.
>>>
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> I think it has been two business days since I raised this motion.
>>> It has support from Paul, Peter, Dave, Mauricio, Cameron,
>>> Markus, Venka and myself with no one expressing a veto or
>>> a strong negative position. As such, barring process concerns
>>> from our chair I declare the motion passed.
>>>
>>> Jachym / Karel - I hope you will treat this as "OSGeo is
>>> reasonable comfortable with your naming your conference
>>> FOSS4G CEE".
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
> 
>