[OSGeo-Conf] Question Period: Bonn proposal

[Jeff McKenna]

Thanks Till for your explanations.  I don't have any more comments at 
the moment, so I will let the Conference Committee ask questions.

-jeff



On 2015-02-24 5:43 PM, Till Adams wrote:
> Dear Jeff (and hello conference-list),
>
> thanks for your detailed review of our proposal. We reduce our answers
> to where you really asked a question. First we cited your question, then
> answered, marked with a "->"
>
>
> - 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).
>
> -> Okay, understood, the effect you describe is definitely not what we
> want.On the other hand, we need a planning base for the Ice Breaker.
> Might be we can include Ice Breaker in the conference fees, if any of
> our possibilities to save money comes up.
>
>
> - 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.
>
> -> The term is Free for use. No copyright on that ;-)
>
>
> - 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)
>
> -> That's true, we did not mark this in the program draft, as we did not
> want to do too much plannings in advance. We think there are at least
> two possibilities, either to let one workshop track be kind of
> "Introduction"-Workshops with a more general focus and maybe successive.
> Also or as an alternative there is definitely the chance to rent another
> room or to get a lecture theatre inside university, depending on where
> the workshops will be.
>
>
> - 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?
>
> -> I guess WCCB told us, that the technique for that is available in all
> rooms. In case that does not work, we as FOSSGIS have some contacts, as
> we are also recording all FOSSGIS tracks.
>
>
> - 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).
>
> -> Of course, the spatial seperation makes sense from the cost view. If
> we get rooms for that offsite and if they are really too far, we can
> count onour PCO, whoalready provided such a shuttle service for another
> conference before.
>
>
> - Section 5.4: in your budget I don't seem to see any costs for the Code
>   Sprint (such as venue and catering).
>
> -> We have several possibilities for code Sprint inside university,
> which will not cause extra costs for room rent. We have finally to
> decide, where we go. For the catering I am sure to find a sponsor (at
> least my own company ;-)). So we do not see extra costs coming up here.
>
>
> So far, if anything still remains as an open issue, please don't
> hesitate ask!
>
> Best regards, for the Bonn team,
>
> Till
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Am 21.02.2015 22:48, schrieb Jeff McKenna:
>> 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
>> and unique.
>>
>> - 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.
>>
>>
>> -jeff
>>
>>