[OSGeo-Conf] OSGeo Booth

Sat Sep 5 04:42:37 PDT 2015

I've tweaked the OSGeo Handbook to include suggestions below:
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook#OSGeo_Branding

On 3/09/2015 11:45 pm, till.adams at fossgis.de wrote:
> for us it's already done:
> http://2016.foss4g.org/
>
> I hope that's visible enough ;-)
>
> Till
>
>
> Am 2015-09-03 15:43, schrieb Steven Feldman:
>> Well said Barry
>>
>> Conf Cttee shall we make that a request for 2016 and a requirement
>> thereafter?
>>
>>  ______
>> Steven
>>
>>> On 3 Sep 2015, at 10:18, Barry Rowlingson
>>> <b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk [4]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I've also noticed a decline, or at least a wild variability, in
>>> prominence of "OSGeo" on FOSS4G web site front pages:
>>>
>>> 2007: "Presented by" + logo and link in sidebar.
>>> 2008: [CSS broken?]
>>> 2009: "Hosted by" in sidebar with OSGeo logo and link to osgeo.org
>>> [5]
>>> 2010: "Hosted by" in sidebar with OSGeo logo and link to osgeo.org
>>> [6]
>>> 2011: OSGeo mentioned in text, "...is brought to you by" + logo and
>>> link in footer
>>> 2012: [No conference]
>>> 2013: "OSGeo's Global Conference" in main title. Logo in carousel.
>>> "is
>>> a production of" + logo and link in footer
>>> 2014: "is a production of the OSGeo organization" in text of footer
>>> with link. No logo at all.
>>> 2015: Mentioned in box at bottom. "Proudly hosted by OSGeo.
>>> Organized
>>> by OSGeo Korean Chapter" in footer. No logo, no link.
>>>
>>> Only 2009, 2010 and 2013 have the OSGeo logo "above the fold" (ie
>>> visible on my screen without scrolling)
>>>
>>> Surely OSGeo should have at least as much website prominence as the
>>> top sponsors? For Nottingham, I think I wanted the "OSGeo's Global
>>> Conference" tag line to be used for Nottingham 2013 to stress that
>>> this wasn't a regional event and that it was an OSGeo event. Perhaps
>>> that tag line should be encouraged?
>>>
>>> If FOSS4G really is "Proudly hosted by OSGeo", then OSGeo really
>>> needs
>>> to stop being so shy about it...
>>>
>>> Barry
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:50 PM, Steven Feldman <shfeldman at gmail.com
>>> [7]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>> This shouldn't be a touchy subject. It should be a mandatory
>>>> requirement on bidders for a FOSS4G
>>>>
>>>> My suggestion - the organisers should provide a space of similar
>>>> size and specifications to that offered to top level sponsors in a
>>>> prominent location. OSGeo should be responsible for fitting out
>>>> the stand and staffing it
>>>>
>>>> If the conference committee agree we can make this a requirement
>>>> for bidders for 2017 (and we can request it from 2016 as part of
>>>> the guarantee agreement)
>>>>
>>>> I suggest that we also require bidders for 2017 and beyond to
>>>> provide details of any advances and guarantees that they require
>>>> with supporting schedules as part of their proposals
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Steven
>>>>
>>>> +44 (0) 7958 924101
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On 1 Sep 2015, at 21:36, Jeff McKenna
>>>>> <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com [1]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello Conference Committee,
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to discuss something, that, in all honesty is a
>>>>> very touchy subject, as there never seems to be a good time to
>>>>> discuss this (I may offend current local committees, past local
>>>>> committees). So, this is a disclaimer: In this message I am not
>>>>> referring to any past or current FOSS4G. I am merely needing to
>>>>> explain the issue, so we can possibly handle this for future
>>>>> events. And I realize that the experienced Conference Committee
>>>>> members will know the best way to handle this from now on.
>>>>>
>>>>> Each year I must contact the FOSS4G local committee and ask
>>>>> about an OSGeo booth. Now, the local committee has to please its
>>>>> sponsors and attract more sponsorship revenue and there is a lot
>>>>> of pressure on them for this reason. (OSGeo is never classed as
>>>>> a sponsor) Yet, here is OSGeo, the host of the event, the
>>>>> foundation who awarded the team the event, the foundation who
>>>>> provided the necessary seed money a year in advance, the
>>>>> foundation who gave the local committee the spotlight, and so
>>>>> on...asking for a booth as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> On my (OSGeo) side, I want a large prominent booth; I do not
>>>>> want OSGeo to be given a small booth away from the main
>>>>> exhibition area, facing a wall etc. In fact, sure, I want OSGeo
>>>>> to have a double-booth, we want to be seen, to show that 'hey
>>>>> yes we are hosting this event, we are great, we do great
>>>>> things'.
>>>>>
>>>>> The reality is that there is no requirement to give OSGeo a
>>>>> booth, as it is not mentioned in the FOSS4G RFP.
>>>>>
>>>>> If it is not in the RFP (and here is where my tongue gets tied
>>>>> always) should I be asking the OSGeo Board for approval to
>>>>> become a platinum sponsor, of our own event, so we can get a
>>>>> great booth? Imagine that reaction. Then, what happens is I
>>>>> instead ask for a booth to the local committee, and they often
>>>>> do their best to give OSGeo a booth.
>>>>>
>>>>> My question is: should the OSGeo Conference Committee be
>>>>> including the OSGeo exhibition booth as a requirement for
>>>>> hosting FOSS4G, by adding this to the RFP; or should the OSGeo
>>>>> Board be looking at ways to become platinum sponsors for FOSS4G
>>>>> as well?
>>>>>
>>>>> I really feel that this should (well it is) become a
>>>>> requirement. If it is written in the RFP then this pressure is
>>>>> removed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does the OSGeo booth hurt the event's bottom line? (less sponsor
>>>>> space etc., less sponsor revenue) Yes this does open a can of
>>>>> worms, back to the focus/priority/goal of FOSS4G. And I also am
>>>>> acutely aware of OSGeo's lack of marketing committee and
>>>>> materials (it is funny how I/we are asking for great booth
>>>>> space, and yet we don't have professional marketing materials, I
>>>>> realize the irony here). Even still, this needs to be discussed
>>>>> openly.
>>>>>
>>>>> But I feel that it is the OSGeo Conference Committee that can
>>>>> solve this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for understanding,
>>>>>
>>>>> -jeff
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org [2]
>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org [3]
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>>
>>
>> Links:
>> ------
>> [1] mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
>> [2] mailto:Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> [3] mailto:Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> [4] mailto:b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk
>> [5] http://osgeo.org
>> [6] http://osgeo.org
>> [7] mailto:shfeldman at gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

-- 
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099