[OSGeo-Conf] [Board] next year's representative at FOSS4G Conference

[Volker Mische]

Hi all,

On 04/15/2015 09:53 AM, Till Adams wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In general OSGEO wants and more or less expects that the chair or
> another representative of the following conference is present on the
> preceding event. That's fair and also in my eyes more or less a "must".

I agree.

> But it is not sure, that my (above lined out) situation fits to all
> following chairs of a FOSS4G conference in future. So I think, there
> should be a binding agreement in general.
>
> If a company pays for all the costs for travelling, accomodation and
> also conference fees, the company expects (regardless whether the
> representative is shareholder or employee) that the person benefits from
> the conference in the sense of the company. This leads to the situation,
> that the next chair is present, but as a delegate and also by order of
> OSGEO.
> In my eyes, something does not really fit here.

I think that's OK. Being a chair is already a commitment to the OSGeo 
from the company you work. So you have to play both roles (being a 
representative of the company and the OSGeo).

> I think, if OSGEO really wants the chair/ a representative to invite to
> the following conference, the representative should be there by order of
> OSGEO. This is at least part of marketing and therefore in my eyes at
> least part of the marketing budget of the next conference -- if so that
> OSGEO does not care for this.

If there is budget, it should be from marketing, but I don't think there 
should be a budget (see more below).

> The representative in case on his/her side should be expected to act
> professionally enough, not to mix up FOSS4G and company interests in
> that case. That's the same what e.g. Jeff as president or other board
> members do as well all the time (not to mix up!) ;-)

Agreed.

> The other way would be to write clearly down in the proposal-requests,
> that OSGEO expects the chair to be present on the preceding conference
> by on his/her own account.
>
> That's just what It think - regardless of what will be decided for now
> or for the conference from 2017 or whenever. For me personnally not that
> problem, I will come to Seoul anyway :-). But worth to start a
> discussion here.

I guess it's clear that it's good to have a representative at the 
preceding FOSS4G. Though I would personally wonder if there really won't 
be anyone attending. So far someone of the LOCs has been to previous 
FOSS4G (I guess that's also often a reason to give such a LOC the 
conference), so why shouldn't be someone be at the preceding one.

Hence I'm against having it part of the budget as mentioned in other 
mails it can become quite costly, which would mean the attendees would 
pay for it and I don't really see a huge benefit for them. I would 
rather have a video presence then.

Another reason for not having it in the budget is that it would be 
unfair due to the rotation of the location. Someone of the European 
conference would always need to go "somewhere else", while the one of 
the US conference would always travel to Europe (and  I expect that 
"somewhere else" is often a bit more expensive).

Cheers,
   Volker