[OSGeo-Conf] [Local-chapters] Using the FOSS4G brand

Thu Nov 21 05:00:32 PST 2013

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

(Reposting again with other id, in case someone is not on local chaps)

The announcement of FOSS4G-E in Bremen came as a surprise to the
organizing committee of FOSSGIS e.V. We have a regular FOSSGIS
conference with a few hundred attendees. This year it takes place in
Berlin just two months earlier. Worse, FOSSGIS organizes an OSGeo day at
the AGIT conference just ten days prior to the FOSS4G-E. In case that
FOSS4G comes to Germany we would make sure that there is no local
FOSSGIS competing for attendees in that same year. Just some coordination.

In the meanwhile we could sort out things and everything is fine now. No
one dead, just minor injuries. This could have been prevented if we had
a pool of all planned events and people communicating about what they
plan *up front*.

This has also been done for some time by trying to maintain lists and
categories in the OSGeo Wiki [0] but if we don't ask for this then
nobody will do it. Hence my suggestion to make things a bit more
transparent and require people to at least announce what they do if they
tag it with the term FOSS4G. Not a big thing really - I wrongly thought.
:-) There is so much contention around using the name "FOSS4G" that we
are apparently missing the point all the time.

Cheers,
Arnulf

[0] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Category:Events

On 21.11.2013 12:44, Gert-Jan van der Weijden wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> First of all the news from the Lowlands: Last week we had our annual
> OSgeo.nl day 2013 last week (120 participants).
>
> As member of the organizing committee my main concern regarding coordination
> was a local one: an overcrowded geospatial agenda that week: for instance a
> linked open data event on exactly the same day (just 5 miles away from our
> venue in Delft!) but geospatial-related conferences, with overlapping target
> audiences, were held every single day last week. This caused at least one
> geo-related event (the day after our conference) to be cancelled due to a
> lack of participants.
>
>
> Just curious: can anybody explain what exactly the overlap between two (or
> more) open geospatial events was that Arnulf refers to?
>
>
> Greetings,
>
>
> Gert-Jan
>
>
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: local-chapters-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
> [mailto:local-chapters-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] Namens Seven (aka Arnulf)
> Verzonden: woensdag 20 november 2013 18:48
> Aan: Venkatesh Raghavan; Conference Dev; board at lists.osgeo.org;
> local-chapters
> Onderwerp: Re: [Local-chapters] [OSGeo-Conf] Using the FOSS4G brand
>
> Venka,
> apparently we are mixing things up here. For clarification I would like to
> separate the issues touched in related posts. The question is not whether or
> not to deny or allow anybody to use the FOSS4G brand. Instead my proposal is
> that OSGeo should help to coordinate events better.
>
> Recent events have demonstrated that an uncoordinated proliferation of
> conference announcements without proper coordination up front leads to
> confusion and agitation. This is damaging to the community as a whole and
> easily avoidable by simply prepending an announcement of the intention to
> hold an event. Then allow the broadest possible community to apprehend what
> is going on and let them voice their opinion. This is so obvious that so far
> we have not seen the need to require this but the recent experiences show
> that it would be helpful to write this down and make it a requirement.
> * If not OSGeo where else can we do this?
> * If not through OSGeo how else can we reach that many communities?
> * If we do not trust OSGeo, then who can we trust with this responsibility?
>
> All other considerations regarding revenue coming out of FOSS4G and how to
> allocate them to Local Chapters, OSGeo global or whoever else may be
> entitled are different topics. I would like to first find general consensus
> that there is a need to better coordinate events.
>
> If there is considerable resistance to working in a more coordinated way I
> will happily drop the topic and do something more useful.
>
> Best regards,
> Arnulf
>
> On 20.11.2013 17:32, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:
>> Dear All,
>
>> I think this discussion has been done before in discuss [1] and board
>> lists.
>> History of FOSS4G is documented at [2] and [3]
>
>> FOSS4G refers a philosophy/concept/technology and cannot be branded.
>> Since it existed before the formation of OSGeo foundation, OSGeo
>> foundation cannot/need not claim ownership to FOSS4G.
>
>> Hoping see more FOSS4G in the bazaar.
>
>> Best
>
>> Venka
>
>> [1]http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2011-November/009759.html
>> [2]http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G
>> [3]http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2011-November/009762.html
>
>
>> On 2013/11/20 18:47, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:
>> Folks,
>> there has been some confusion around the brand FOSS4G, how to organize
>> local conferences in general, how to link back to OSGeo and so on.
>
>> As a result of these ongoings I suggest that OSGeo take more ownership
>> of the brand FOSS4G. The main reason is to avoid confusion, improve
>> transparency and make sure that the name FOSS4G continues to stand for
>> quality events.
>
>> Therefore I suggest that anybody who wants to use the name FOSS4G has
>> to first ask/announce this on this mailing list *before* making it a
>> public event, sign any contracts, etc.
>
>> What is "ask/announce"? Not sure, we may need to better define. From a
>> do-ocratic [1] point of view anybody should be allowed to go ahead. At
>> the same time we should strive to avoid conflicts with other events
>> close by, go easy on volunteer resources, etc. Maybe we can implement
>> a very simple rule: If nobody complains / raises issues within two
>> weeks of announcing on the Conference-dev list the organizer can go ahead.
>
>> Later we may also want to make sure (make it a rule) that a trusted
>> OSGeo person is part of the LOC.
>
>> What is a "trusted OSGeo person"? Anybody with an official role, be it
>> board, committee, or chair. If necessary we have to clarify. Again,
>> I'd like to keep it simple...
>
>> Once we have talked about this here and if we agree I would like to
>> make this a motion to be approved by the Board at one of their next
> meetings.
>
>> A general question is whether the conference committee is prepared to
>> take on this additional job at all. It appears to be the best place
>> but if you think this belongs elsewhere please advise.
>
>> Best regards,
>> Arnulf
>
>> [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Do-ocracy
>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Local-chapters mailing list
> Local-chapters at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/local-chapters
>
> _______________________________________________
> Local-chapters mailing list
> Local-chapters at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/local-chapters
>

- -- 
Arnulf Christl (Director)
The metaspatial Institute Certification:
Open Source - Open Data - Open Standards
http://www.metaspatial.net/en/institute
_______________________________________________
Local-chapters mailing list
Local-chapters at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/local-chapters

- -- 
Exploring Space, Time and Mind
http://arnulf.us
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlKOA/AACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b1pxACeKuFOlq5LkUXHVWyqVocwZN6L
QkoAn2qW0g2nsh6bvCcm/YhF3t28BfPD
=2DQU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----