[OSGeo-Conf] Question Period: Bonn proposal
jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
Sat Feb 21 13:48:53 PST 2015
Hello Till and Bonn team,
Thanks for your detailed proposal, here are my questions and comments on
your full proposal:
- your proposal is easy to follow, as it closely follows the RFP
"Requirements" section (that's page 9 and 10, for OSGeo conference
committee members reading this)
- Section 1.4: thank you for putting OSGeo into the focus. As you
mention later, this could be by highlighting the AGM, and even little
things (yet so important) such as OSGeo logos and banners on all venue
stages, signs, and websites.
- Section 1.4.2: I agree on the importance of social events. I have
noticed a negative effect however on charging in advance for these
social events, especially for such things as ice breakers and closing
parties (attendees just want to know where to go, to buy a beer and
network, and I've received many many complaints about charging for
tickets for things like ice breakers over the years) Especially as so
many travel for FOSS4G, and the first day ice breaker many haven't
thought of 'tickets' and just want to see friends/peers. I find that
these extra 'tickets' can separate the community (half goes to the paid
event, and the other half doesn't want to pay the ticket and is
scattered around the city).
- Section 1.4.5: I like this term "Pub Race", finally after all these
years we have a name for why we are so tired after 6 nights of a FOSS4G
event, from "racing" ha.
- Section 1.5: I think it's wonderful that you put focus on the
GeoForAll education initiative.
- Section 1.6: I really like your plan for an information session for
the "FOSS-uneducated", as you said, it was super-successful in Denver.
You suggest a half day session, but I can't find it mentioned anywhere
else, such as in the proposed program. Would it likely happen on the
second workshop day (the day before the sessions begin)? Would there be
any additional costs associated with it? (I'm very for this, but I just
want to make sure you catch these costs in your proposed budget and program)
- Section 2.3.3: indeed the parliamentary plenary hall looks beautiful
- Section 2.3.4: Pat on the back for already meeting with WCCB staff.
Your tech requirements listed show that your team understands the
demands of FOSS4G attendees.
- Section 2.3.5: Recording of presentations is very important, and then
of course archiving them on the website. Portland team raised the bar
by live streaming FOSS4G talks, are you also considering this?
- Section 2.5: Free public transportation ticket for the stay is wonderful.
- Section 3.2: Thank you for addressing my concerns of multiple
conference chairs. Overall I am impressed with the proposed local
committee. And how nice it is to see someone already tasked with
conference bags, shirts, etc.
- Section 4.1: My own opinion is that of course workshops would make
more sense offsite at the university (and not in the expensive WCCB
venue). But as it is a few kms away, I would suggest providing
transportation from WCCB to workshop site (many FOSS4Gs did provide this
transportation free of charge to attendees).
- having FOSSGIS e.V. as organizer and using its reduced VAT rate as
charitable organization should definitely be examined.
- My opinion is that the gala event should be included in the
conference fees. Networking is one of the biggest benefits of a FOSS4G
event, and as I said earlier, these extra 'tickets' cause negative
impressions on FOSS4G attendees.
- Section 4.2: I was at first a little surprised at how only Netherlands
was mentioned as part of the community (in the first sections of your
proposal), so it is good to see here that your team realizes the
importance of the whole European community.
- Section 5.4: in your budget I don't seem to see any costs for the Code
Sprint (such as venue and catering).
- Section 5.6: I don't see any issues of the proposed end of August timing.
- Section 5.8: Thank you for explaining the relationship between FOSSGIS
and FOSS4G (as well as language). I agree with your proposed plan to
keep the events separate.
- Section 5.9: Connecting the EARSel remote sensing network with FOSS4G
could be wonderful indeed (and in full support from the mayor and
university). Not to mention a possible reduction in venue costs (90% ?!).
- Section 6.2: Nice to see that you have already selected a PCO, so the
conference committee can learn about the PCO beforehand.
- Section 6.3: I like the draft logos (second option, ha).
Thanks again for this proposal.
More information about the Conference_dev