[OSGeo-Conf] [Board] 50% FOSS4G-NA profits to NA

Cameron Shorter cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Tue Aug 21 13:56:26 PDT 2012

On 21/08/2012 10:08 PM, David William Bitner wrote:
>     3. Earmark a minimum of 50% of net conference profits for future
>     FOSS4G
>        North America events (excluding the main FOSS4G international
>     event).
>     *  I think this is a valid request, but there are many grey areas
>     associated with the wide comment and I believe it requires more
>     discussion (at least weeks). FOSS4G-NA, in the interests of
>     getting this motion approved, can we please remove this point from
>     the motion.
> No. We are willing to refine this statement, but as we received 100% 
> of net conference profits from our preceding event, we feel it is only 
> fair if we pass a significant amount forward to make sure this event 
> continues. Would limiting it to an earmark of 50% to a 2015 NA Event 
> (2014 if the 2014 International event is not in NA) with that amount 
> rolling back to OSGeo general funds were it not to happen limit this 
> better for you?

I'm breaking discussion out as a separate thread.
My concerns with this statement is that while OSGeo may wish to provide 
this support, there are a number of valid scenarios where it will be 
difficult to deliver, and how OSGeo delivers is open to mis-interpretation.
As we are seeing right now, Conferences need funds to secure a 
conference. Assuming everything goes to plan, these funds will never be 
used, they just sit in the bank acting as a guarantee. Is this what the 
50% funds are to be used for? (I think this is a valid request).
Can FOSS4G-NA spend all of the 50% funds on extra activities (such as 
sponsoring a code sprint), at the expense of retaining security funds 
for next year? I think that security funds need to be kept in the bank, 
and if there is some money left over, then there could be extra funds 
spend on extra activities.
If these funds are sitting in the bank, then can OSGeo use these 50% 
funds to secure another conference in an off year? I think OSGeo should 
be able to.
If the other conference fails, and OSGeo looses much of its capital, 
does OSGeo need to honour its commitment to FOSS4G-NA at the expense of 
OSGeo's core business? I don't think so.
And if FOSS4G-NA put such clauses into agreements with OSGeo, then 
expect them from the rest of the world as well. Who do you propose will 
manage, monitor and arbitrate on all these agreements? Note that OSGeo 
doesn't have any paid staff.

As you can see from above, there are lots of questions, which I think 
will take weeks and probably longer to consider.

As such I would like to move forward without this statement included in 
the agreement, but with an understanding that FOSS4G-NA wish to have "a 
minimum of 50% of net conference profits for future FOSS4G North America 
events (excluding the main FOSS4G international event)", and the OSGeo 
Board acknowledging that this is a reasonable request which the board 
would like to honour in principle, but which the board is not ready to 
commit to until the details have been considered.

Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Solutions Manager
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254

Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20120822/8ca6cf6f/attachment.html>

More information about the Conference_dev mailing list