[OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G 2016 and 2017 and 2018 Call for Hosting

Steven Feldman shfeldman at gmail.com
Mon Dec 22 05:48:04 PST 2014

Fair points Arnulf

Surely the announcement requesting LoI’s can be anticipated by potential bid teams who can start their venue planning etc before the official announcement. 

We know 2016 is Europe, 2017 is America, 2018 is somewhere else 2019 is Europe, 2020 America and 2012 is somewhere else - do teams bidding for 2017 onwards need any more notification than that?

> On 19 Dec 2014, at 11:52, Seven (aka Arnulf) <seven at arnulf.us> wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Steven,
> in my experience there are several distinct phases and the very initial
> phase of selecting a venue, coordinating with parallel events, starting
> dialogs about co-location etc. need to be done with enough time to go.
> This will typically be done by a small team of initial firestarters.
> Later on the team will grow and include others. The last sprint planning
> meeting will take place just a few months prior to the conference.
> Therefore I would not think that an early CfP will result in a tired or
> burnt-out team. It is the responsibility of the LOC chair to manage
> accordingly (as you have brilliantly managed to) and take care that the
> team will not be stretched too hard (...until a few weeks prior to the
> event when the team has to go full throttle).
> Cheers,
> Arnulf
> On 19.12.2014 08:33, Steven Feldman wrote:
>> I am not sure that I agree that LOCs need or want more than 18-20
>> months notice. Whilst there may be a benefit in terms of venue
>> booking, there could be a downside in team fatigue and drop out
>> For FOSS4G2013 we started thinking about the event and putting a team
>> together in September 2011. We were ready with a venue (provisional
>> booking) by the time the call for LoIs came out.
>> Steven
>>> On 19 Dec 2014, at 01:13, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>>> Conference Committee,
>>> Consistent feedback from previous LOCs is "make the FOSS4G LOC 
>>> decision with more time before the event".  The 2016 decision is 
>>> slated to be made on 2015-03-01 [1].  Should we launch the 2017 
>>> process on 2015-03-02?  It seems that LOCs are eagerly awaiting
>>> the opportunity to bid and are more than prepared once the process 
>>> happens.
>>> A LOC decision with more time before the event may also be the
>>> single best way to ensure success and reduce risk.  It is also
>>> super easy.  I suggest moving up the 2017 and 2018 timelines.
>>> Until there are complaints from potential LOCs that the decision is
>>> too early or more importantly if there are no quality bids, then I
>>> think the decision can be made sooner.
>>> Claude, Sorry to hear that there is not suitable date availability
>>> at your top choice venue.  I'm sure that if Lausanne bids it would
>>> be one of several very excellent bids.  Had the bid been earlier
>>> and awarded to Lasanne, I'm sure that the LOC would already be well
>>> on the way to a great conference.
>>> Best regards, Eli
>>> [1] http://www.osgeo.org/conference/rfp/
>> _______________________________________________ Conference_dev
>> mailing list Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org 
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
> - -- 
> Exploring Space, Time and Mind
> http://arnulf.us <http://arnulf.us/>
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> lM8AnRKDuLTKE2mWxymvfYO1ekiMVqiz
> =l4Nu
> _______________________________________________
> 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 <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20141222/99312353/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Conference_dev mailing list