[OSGeo-Conf] Analysing the downfall of FOSS4G 2011

[Paul Ramsey]

Jeff,
Your suggestion moves in the opposite direction Dave is proposing.
Dave says the problem is that the conf. committee is relatively
removed from the strategic concerns of the foundation (like financial
issues) and that the board should take a stronger hand. Handing the
decision to the charter membership moves the decision to a population
even further removed from those issues than the conf. committee.
P.

On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Jeff McKenna
<jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com> wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> I agree with your points (this committee managing the proposal and
> review process), but I would like to see the final voting/decision go to
> the OSGeo Charter members (we really need to utilize our diverse Charter
> members).  I would also like to utilize an independent CRO to manage
> these votes (similar to what was recently proposed for the OSGeo elections).
>
> Hello from the foggy East Coast!
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
>
> On 12-08-16 11:11 AM, Dave McIlhagga wrote:
>> And there's selection process as well. If the preference for "not North America or Europe" had not been in place - the selection would surely have gone to Prague where there would have been a much stronger likelihood of success.
>>
>> This and Steven Feldman's recent email about expecting to have some cash for back-stopping FOSS4G in the UK (which is of course more than appropriate) has me questioning again if we really have this committee functioning the way it should.
>>
>> Given that selection of the FOSS4G site and now making decisions about supporting other events are arguably among the most important decisions OSGeo makes for financial, community building and many other perspectives - does it not make more sense to have this selection and decision made by the board - ie. the people that are in fact selected by the charter membership to make important decisions for the organization?
>>
>> I'd like to suggest that we re-think the role of the committee to becoming an advisory and support role -- one where we go through the process of reviewing and evaluating proposals, providing feedback etc.., but instead of voting - providing feedback to the board who would then make the decisions.
>>
>> Once a decision is made by the board -- then this committee's work can shift towards supporting the various LOCs in their efforts to pull off the event that OSGeo is supporting.
>>
>> I really think that in this light, the decision about FOSS4G 2012 may well have been different.
>>
>>
>> I would also suggest -- this is an issue the board needs to discuss and make a decision on. Right now, my feeling is the tail is wagging the dog -- and I'm personally uncomfortable with the power this committee has on the overall organization as a result of the decisions we are being asked to make.
>>
>> Dave
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev