[OSGeo-Conf] [Board] FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal
Andrew Ross
andrew.ross at eclipse.org
Thu Aug 28 07:01:20 PDT 2014
+1, very well said.
On 28/08/14 09:52, Steven Feldman wrote:
> I know there is a strong view that outreach to non US and European
> locations is important for OSGeo, however I would question whether
> there is enough local audience to sustain our annual 'global' event
> given constraints that many of us have on travel. Perhaps we should
> consider encouraging large locally organised regional events run in
> these key emerging rather than trying to run a global event? As the
> size of the regional communities grows to the point where they can
> sustain a global event with the extra cost, sponsorship and
> organisational overhead then we can reconsider.
> ______
> Steven
>
>
> On 28 Aug 2014, at 14:31, Daniel Kastl <daniel at georepublic.de
> <mailto:daniel at georepublic.de>> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> And I would like to ask, if Eclipse Foundation staff would be able to
>> run a conference some other place than Europe or North America.
>> Because I looked at the past EclipseCon conference locations, and I
>> couldn't find any other conference location than in Europe or North
>> America.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Bart van den Eijnden
>> <bartvde at osgis.nl <mailto:bartvde at osgis.nl>> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Andrew,
>>
>> in the case where the Eclipse Foundation staff would run the
>> FOSS4G event, would OSGeo still issue the RFP? Or would this be
>> done by the Eclipse Foundation instead?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Bart
>>
>> On 28 Aug 2014, at 15:09, Andrew Ross <andrew.ross at eclipse.org
>> <mailto:andrew.ross at eclipse.org>> wrote:
>>
>> > Cameron,
>> >
>> > I'd like to start (continue?) the discussion by simply offering
>> to have the Eclipse Foundation staff run a regular event on
>> behalf of the FOSS4G community (including OSGeo projects,
>> LocationTech projects, & many other related organizations and
>> unaffiliated projects) similar to what we proposed for Washington
>> D.C.. It was a detailed proposal so perhaps a good place to start
>> with and frame the discussion. Unless I'm mistaken, much of it
>> may be quite acceptable and help us narrow what could be an
>> overwhelming discussion down to a few key areas. Is this reasonable?
>> >
>> > For what it's worth, I'm definitely open minded if there's a
>> better approach.
>> >
>> > Andrew
>> >
>> > On 27/08/14 16:54, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>> >> All good ideas.
>> >> Anyone up for consolidating ideas into a proposal, then obtain
>> agreement from the conference committee?
>> >> A start has been made at:
>> >> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook
>> >> In particular:
>> >> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook#Editing_this_document
>> >>
>> >> It still requires some integration with the FOSS4G RFP
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 27/08/2014 3:54 am, Andrew Ross wrote:
>> >>> Thanks for the clarification Peter. For what it's worth, I
>> agree that a clearly defined mechanism makes a lot of sense.
>> >>>
>> >>> On 26/08/14 12:08, Peter Baumann wrote:
>> >>>> sorry, folks, that was not intended to go into this thread
>> but another one. Now I see I have not been fast enough with ESC.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> OK, another attempt to say something meaningful:
>> >>>> OSGeo might license its brand to conferences, and this
>> allows them to send invoices even to universities. Secures OSGeo
>> a fixed income, allowing LOCs to plan ahead.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -Peter
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 08/26/2014 05:42 PM, Andrew Ross wrote:
>> >>>>> Sorry Peter, I'm not sure I understand your comment?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 26/08/14 11:22, Peter Baumann wrote:
>> >>>>>> so back with universities :)
>> >>>>>> -Peter
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On 08/26/2014 05:16 PM, Andrew Ross wrote:
>> >>>>>>> Very good point.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> A not-for-profit organizer may be a significant benefit
>> and simplify things quite a bit.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> A bunch more legal/fiscal issues emerge when you run
>> events and have to handle and transfer funds internationally. The
>> number of organizations who can handle this is fairly limited and
>> those that do so for a reasonable fee even more so. Continuity
>> helps make it worthwhile to figure this out in the first place
>> and stay on top of it as things change over time.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 26/08/14 10:59, Darrell Fuhriman wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> Amen. We burned at least two months, maybe three,
>> working that out.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I think it's actually really funny that the first piece
>> of advice given to the LOC by OSGeo is "Find a conference
>> organizer to help you."
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> If that's the first piece of advice, then it seems
>> pretty clear to me that OSGeo should just have a conference
>> organizer on contract. The benefits of continuity from year to
>> year would be enormous.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> d.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Aug 26, 2014, at 07:54, David William Bitner
>> <bitner at dbspatial.com <mailto:bitner at dbspatial.com>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> And none of this even discusses the hassles that a
>> grass roots organizing group has with finding an entity to act as
>> a fiscal agent (aka deal with the money).
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Conference_dev mailing list
>> > Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
>> eMail: daniel.kastl at georepublic.de <mailto:daniel.kastl at georepublic.de>
>> Web: http://georepublic.info <http://georepublic.info/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20140828/471f8c47/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Conference_dev
mailing list