[OSGeo-Conf] Conference bidding procedures
eadam at co.lincoln.or.us
Tue Nov 1 21:09:09 PDT 2016
Unless Steven or Till suggest otherwise, I suggest that we continue as
the RFP suggests:
If more than one Letter of Intent is received, members of the OSGeo
Conference Committee will vote by each selecting a single letter as
their choice. A letter must receive the backing of at least two
members to move on to the full proposal stage. Exact voting results
will not be released. The committee reserves the right to extend the
selection deadline and solicit additional proposals at its discretion.
Stage 2: Bid Submission
Once your Letter of Intent has been accepted you must then submit a
full proposal, as outlined next. If only one letter is received in
Stage 1, a full proposal is still required.
You are advised to read one or two successful Proposals from previous
FOSS4G selection processes, see
That is we are in the scenario of having only one letter of intent
accepted and that team is required to submit a full proposal with all
the same deadlines and everything else.
The Tanzania team has not been selected at this point. They will have
to submit a convincing bid in accordance with all the requirements and
deadlines, answer pointed questions on the list, and earn conference
committee members' trust and votes that they will put on another
If for some reason the Tanzania team does not do this or it is not a
convincing bid, then the committee may reopen the 2018 bid process and
probably open it to the whole world.
The RFP for reference:
Best regards, Eli
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 7:44 PM, Peter Batty <peter at ebatty.com> wrote:
>> We as a conference committee need to decide how to proceed now, in this unusual situation. If the timing had been a little different and the situation had arisen a couple of weeks ago, it is quite possible that the good proposal from Lima would have received more votes and have proceeded to the second stage. I think that we need to have more discussion first, but we may need to vote on whether we feel it is appropriate to ask Lima to submit a more detailed proposal, if they are still interested in doing this, or whether we go ahead and award the conference to Dar es Salaam.
>> In either case I think it is appropriate that we still ask for a full proposal from Dar es Salaam, as this is an important part of the overall planning process for the conference, and of the due diligence for the conference committee to be convinced that a good plan is in place.
>> What do others think about the best way to proceed?
On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Mark Iliffe <markiliffe at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear OSGEO Conference Committee,
> I’d like to second my friend Jorieke’s thoughts and wish to extend my team's condolences to our OSGeo comrades in Thailand at this time.
> I hope that my team and the OSGeo Conference committee can discuss how to proceed and advise on the protocol here. We are continuing to prepare and look forward to hearing what the next stages are.
> Many thanks,
More information about the Conference_dev