[OSGeo-Conf] Fwd: Fwd: FOSS4G 2014 LOI Question & Answer Phase

[David Percy]

oops, I sent this from the wrong address...
:-)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Percy <percy at pdx.edu>
Date: Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:02 AM
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] Fwd: FOSS4G 2014 LOI Question & Answer Phase
To: "seven at arnulf.us" <seven at arnulf.us>
Cc: conference <conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>


Interesting idea, Arnulf, I like giving precedence to OSGEO projects,
etc. However, your formula would leave out some of the exciting new
stuff that hasn't even applied for incubation yet, like currently
MBTiles, for example. I think the LOC needs a lot of latitude in
picking the most relevant workshops.

Cheers,
Percy
(Portland LOC)

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:01 AM, seven at arnulf.us <seven at arnulf.us> wrote:
> Folks,
> instead of leaving the workshop selection open for experiments yet again I
> suggest we simply prescribe how to do it. In simple words something like:
> * Graduated OSGeo projects get precedence over incubating projects over
> others. * Each project is guaranteed to get the *chance* to apply for one
> slot.
> * If a graduated project does not (convincingly) confirm until x weeks
> before the conference that they can pull it off and that there will be
> interest, then slots are filled up by other active projects.
> * Individuals and parties / orgs may wish to collaborate on joint
workshops.
> * Ideally a few slots should be reserved for workshops that may be not
tech
> related, like Edu and Data committee.
>
> Final adjudication lies with the LOC!!!
>
> Maybe we could even propose that rejections are issued a week before
> confirmations giving the rejected parties the opportunity to collaborate
> with accepted parties, complain, get all heated up with the LOC and then
> pacified so that we don't have this public discussion making look us just
a
> bit foolish. And maybe this last idea is just completely insane and would
> only lead to WW 3...
>
> But /me believes that there is is so much experience in this conf
committee
> that we will surly find a good solution to go forward.
>
> Cheers,
> Arnulf
>
> --
> Arnulf Christl (aka Seven)
> http://arnulf.us
>
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Steven Feldman" <shfeldman at gmail.com>
> To: "conference" <conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>, <hmitaso at ncsu.edu>
> Subject: [OSGeo-Conf] Fwd:  FOSS4G 2014 LOI Question & Answer Phase
> Date: Fri, May 17, 2013 09:48
>
>
> Helena
>
> I have to take issue with you when you say
>
> "2. Given the continuing complaints about the selection of workshops and
> presentations how do you plan to handle the submissions so that everybody
> feels welcome and participating rather than turned down and ignored."
>
> To my knowledge there have been no complaints about the selection of
> presentations or academic papers for FOSS4G 2013, nor have people been
made
> to feel unwelcome or ignored. There have been a small number of people who
> have raised concerns regarding the selection of workshops and I and the
LOC
> have acknowledged that the process did not work as well as it could have.
>
> ______
> Steven
>
>
> On 16 May 2013, at 18:17, Paul Ramsey <pramsey at cleverelephant.ca> wrote:
>
>> Here's two questions from Helena Mitasova:
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Helena Mitasova <hmitaso at ncsu.edu>
>> Date: Wed, May 15, 2013 at 4:36 PM
>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G 2014 LOI Question & Answer Phase
>> To: conference <conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>> Cc: Paul Ramsey <pramsey at cleverelephant.ca>
>>
>>
>> Eddie, Darrell,
>>
>> I have two questions about your proposals:
>>
>> 1. How do you plan to distinguish this global conference from the very
>> successfull
>> international regional conferences such as FOSS4G-CEE and FOSS4G-NA?
>> Or, in another words - what are your plans to make this truly global,
>> main FOSS4G
>> conference?
>>
>> 2. Given the continuing complaints about the selection of workshops
>> and presentations
>> how do you plan to handle the submissions so that everybody feels welcome
>> and participating rather than turned down and ignored. Do you have ideas
>> for accomodating presentations/posters by many students and new
>> developers who may
>> have great ideas but are unknown in the community and may not get
>> enough votes for a regular talk.
>> Do you have any innovative ideas about the presentations and
participation
>> that will distinguish this conference?
>>
>> Thank you, Helena
>>
>> Helena Mitasova
>> Associate Professor
>> Department of Marine, Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
>> 2800 Faucette Drive, Rm. 1125 Jordan Hall
>> North Carolina State University
>> Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
>> hmitaso at ncsu.edu
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>



--
David Percy ("Percy")
-Geospatial Data Manager
-Web Map Wrangler
-GIS Instructor
Portland State University
-gisgeek.pdx.edu
-geology.pdx.edu
-portlandpulse.org



-- 
David Percy ("Percy")
-Geospatial Data Manager
-Web Map Wrangler
-GIS Instructor
Portland State University
-gisgeek.pdx.edu
-geology.pdx.edu
-portlandpulse.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20130517/182fe6ba/attachment-0001.html>