[OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G-NA -- request for financial records

Fri Jun 15 07:03:41 PDT 2018

Thank you Rob, for the clear explanation of the history and current state.

Like Stephen I would love to see some major category reporting, which
is all that prior conferences have provided (this isn't an
invoice-by-invoice audit, it's information suitable for future
planning) but if LT is unable to produce that for whatever reason, I
won't light my hair on fire.

Thanks all,
P.

On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 8:26 PM, Rob Emanuele <rdemanuele at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My understanding of what is happening here is this: a LocationTech employee
> mis-spoke about the organization's intentions about reporting financial
> data, which was never a requirement put on the organization nor the
> intention of the organization. The result has been a set of valid questions,
> which should be answered clearly.
>
> I can confirm that the FOSS4G NA core committee never required the Eclipse
> Foundation or LocationTech to report financial data as part of brining them
> on as the logistics organizer.
>
> Moving forward, if the community decides that it's right and fair that the
> organization receiving sponsor money and taking ticket money for the
> conference report on a specific level of P/L data, then that requirement can
> be put into place and clearly communicated before any commitments are made.
> We (the core committee) had asked LocationTech if it was possible to report
> financial data in past years, and they politely declined for the reasons
> listed (I believe fairly), and we dropped the issue. This could represent a
> failing on our part to uphold the ideal of transparency, and if that is the
> case, then this misunderstanding is on us. One could argue we should have
> forced the issue, and if LocationTech had not acquiesced, we should have not
> used them as the LO. I was not of that opinion at the time and remain that
> way, though I understand and respect why transparency is important, and
> could very possibly be wrong. However, I believe LocationTech ran great
> conferences with honest and hard effort, for the good of the community. I
> appreciate the work they put in, while simultaneously hoping that the next
> conference committee, LO, and the core committee can do better in the
> future.
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 9:06 PM, Sara <sara at sarasafavi.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Marc:
>>
>> Please do not bring my employer into this. That is threatening behavior,
>> and is incredibly inappropriate for anyone in this community to engage in.
>>
>> The fact that I was Program Chair of FOSS4G-NA 2018 for six months is no
>> secret: among many reasons documented elsewhere, I found a replacement for
>> myself and stepped down from the role in order to maintain "separation of
>> church & state", as it were, when I felt it was no longer tenable to
>> represent both my employer and FOSS4G-NA at the same time (this directly
>> followed you asking Sara-the-Program-Chair to "wiggle a platinum sponsorship
>> from" her employer).
>>
>> Come on, folks. I'm not trying to make unreasonable demands. I'm not
>> trying to launch any missiles. I'm just trying to continue a conversation
>> that LocationTech staff started on May 4. Personal attacks on me and
>> dismissing this as a "non-discussion" aren't constructive.
>>
>> --Sara
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Marc Vloemans <marcvloemans1 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> After so many tweets, posts, blogs etc. I feel a formal response is
>>> needed.
>>>
>>> LocationTech - as part of a longstanding agreement with the Core
>>> Committee of Foss4g NA - has acted as the contractor/producer of this
>>> conference.
>>> This entailed that all pre-conference investments and financial risks
>>> were off the shoulders of OSGeo.org. Regional conferences like this one
>>> elsewhere in the world are taken on by local/regional chapters. But until
>>> some weeks ago there was no such chapter in North America. Therefor this
>>> special construct.
>>> LocationTech has informed the Core Committee before “St Louis” that we
>>> would  not be able to continue this arrangement as the financial and human
>>> resources were beyond its means.
>>>
>>> The demands made by Sara Safavi to give insight into the books are not
>>> appropriate. Comparable to a customer asking her employer (Planet Labs) to
>>> open their books to a customer. Since FOSS4G NA mostly relied on
>>> professional staff (instead of volunteers like in “Boston” and Companies
>>> sponsoring their employee’s time) this would give third parties indirect
>>> information re salaries etc.
>>> And I will not do that. Ever. Especially if persons try to force my hand,
>>> when they have no legal, moral or other right to this type of personal
>>> information.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, I would like to emphasise that Sara has been Program Chair
>>> of FOSS4G NA 2018 until the deadline for the CfP. She has been aware of this
>>> arrangement from the beginning....
>>>
>>> On another note; this non-discussion is damaging the Core Committee, the
>>> FOSS4G NA and overall brands at large and OSGeo (both .org and US). And the
>>> great working relationship between OSGeo and LocationTech. But furthermore,
>>> it makes our community a place where those who put in actual work and energy
>>> are subjected to harassment. With the silent approval of the majority.....
>>> If we want to keep present/attract future volunteers, partners,
>>> supporters and sponsors we need to put a stop to this type of behaviour.
>>> Right here and now. Otherwise we dig our collective grave.
>>>
>>> If the majority keeps their silence then OSGeo has become a very toxic
>>> place, indeed!
>>>
>>> (And I still wonder whether the demands represent Planet Labs’ (who was a
>>> welcome and respected sponsor of this year’s FOSS4G NA) opinion or not
>>> .....)
>>>
>>> Hope this gives background and puts an end to this non-discussion.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Marc
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > -------- Original Message --------
>>> > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G-NA -- request for financial records
>>> > Date: 2018-06-14 14:23
>>> > From: Sara <sara at sarasafavi.com>
>>> > To: Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
>>> > Cc: michael terner <ternergeo at gmail.com>,
>>> > foss4gna_selection at googlegroups.com, Conference Dev
>>> > <conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> >
>>> > Hi Cameron, all:
>>> >
>>> > Sure, happy to explain further: my request is for information that
>>> > LocationTech already stated publicly was "open", "has always been", and
>>> > would be posted to OSGeo's wiki -- to actually be made open and posted
>>> > to the wiki. If LocationTech either misspoke, lied, or changed their
>>> > mind on that then as a community member/volunteer/sponsor I would like
>>> > to know why. I'm not alone in this, either: I'm just today's squeaky
>>> > wheel. :)
>>> >
>>> > As Steven said:
>>> >> I would not expect preparing a schedule of income and expenditure for
>>> > a conference to be a lot of effort. The organising team or their PCO
>>> > must maintain some schedules to record income and expenditure.
>>> >
>>> > I'm not expecting miracles, but as a community centered around
>>> > transparency and openness it seems unusual to not have at least some
>>> > insight into one of our larger event's basic financial records. As Mike
>>> > & Steven both point out, though not a requirement this is a
>>> > longstanding
>>> > community norm for many FOSS4G events.
>>> >
>>> > Considering the past conversations we've all seen on the distro lists
>>> > re: this working group/LOC specifically and transparency, I'm surprised
>>> > that one now needs to provide "a worthy motivation" to even pose the
>>> > question. Meanwhile off-list I'm getting private messages telling me to
>>> > "just let this go". Did I miss a memo or something?
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Cameron Shorter
>>> > <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Sara,
>>> >> I'd suggest it might be helpful to explain why you are requesting
>>> >> people open the books. Providing a worthy motivation will likely help
>>> >> inspire a volunteer to help you.
>>> >> There is typically quite a bit of volunteer effort required to pull
>>> >> together past data into a usable format. Quite often it requires data
>>> >> to be de-personalised for public consumption. Maybe you can say
>>> >> something along the lines of "if you release the metrics, then I will
>>> >> be able to add value to the osgeo community to help ..."
>>> >> On 14/6/18 8:20 am, michael terner wrote:
>>> >> Sara:
>>> >> I fully support the notion of "open books" and the Boston Team has
>>> >> endeavored to do that. Indeed, when asking volunteers to do so much in
>>> >> this ecosystem it is important to have openness around the finances.
>>> >> This tweet from Matthew Hanson had a picture of the "raw" (and
>>> >> rounded) Boston numbers that I presented in a talk at FOSS4GNA in STL:
>>> >> https://twitter.com/GeoSkeptic/status/996147340854652928 [2]
>>> >> There's one other slide in that deck that showed the net results
>>> >> (i.e., surplus) and I would be happy to share the entire deck with
>>> >> this list if useful. Just ask. (And, we have lots of other more
>>> >> granular data if there are other, specific questions [e.g., speaker
>>> >> fees; # of people who were early bird; etc.]).
>>> >> That said, the numbers by themselves don't tell the entire story as
>>> >> there is a whole lot of context that matters greatly. Stuff like:
>>> >> * Organizers do not know how the numbers will fully add up until a
>>> >> good bit after the conference. Indeed, there are both trailing
>>> >> expenses to pay, and revenue to collect (some of which are dependent
>>> >> on the actual attendance you achieve). And, some
>>> >> accounting/spreadsheet work to do by already tired volunteers.
>>> >> * Conference registrations are slow to pour in. So while Boston
>>> >> ultimately harvested a sizable surplus, we did not know until _2 weeks
>>> >> _before the conference that we had achieved our break-even number. If
>>> >> we knew what our final attendance would be in advance we would have
>>> >> surely lowered our prices and/or better funded the travel grant
>>> >> program. But we, nor any other organizer, has that luxury. We are
>>> >> pleased that some of our surplus is going to support the Dar es Salaam
>>> >> conference through OSGeo _paying_ for sponsorship for that event.
>>> >> * Decisions that organizers make greatly impact the finances. Things
>>>
>>> >> ranging from providing day care, to giving all speakers a free pass,
>>> >> to the location of the host city, greatly impact costs/revenues while
>>> >> serving other important objectives.
>>> >> Indeed, it is an imperfect science and the Boston team was petrified
>>> >> by our finances up until that "break even" moment 2 weeks before the
>>> >> conference started. But it is also the imperfectness of this science
>>> >> that makes "opening the books" so important as all future conferences
>>> >> can learn from both past triumphs and mistakes. I would never look
>>> >> askance at a set of numbers that told a sadder story than Boston's
>>> >> (unless there was abject corruption, or something like that). Running
>>> >> a conference is hard and in all of the FOSS4G and FOSS4GNA conferences
>>> >> I've volunteered on (which now numbers 5, and includes STL) I have
>>> >> never doubted than anyone acted in a way other than to deliver the
>>> >> best possible conference at the lowest possible cost. I also don't
>>> >> expect that everyone would make the same choices that we did in
>>> >> Boston. Indeed, the Chair and his/her LOC make the choices they feel
>>> >> will lead to the best/most successful conference. Second guessing is a
>>> >> natural impulse, but it easier to do than running the conference. And,
>>> >> from my vantage, open books are important as they serve to help
>>> >> explain the choices that were made, and the financial impact of those
>>> >> choices.
>>> >> Sincerely,
>>> >> MT
>>> >> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:18 PM Sara <sara at sarasafavi.com> wrote:
>>> >> Hi folks,
>>> >> Some of you may be aware that for the past ~5 weeks, I have
>>> >> periodically renewed a public request [0] for FOSS4G-NA 2018's
>>> >> financial records.
>>> >> Yesterday, Marc Vloemans, speaking on behalf of LocationTech, said
>>> >> that I was "misrepresenting" this issue [1]. That's certainly not my
>>> >> intent, so I'd like to clarify the basis for my ongoing request in
>>> >> longform, and renew said request in this forum.
>>> >> - On May 4, 2018, a LocationTech representative stated publicly that
>>> >> FOSS4G-NA's "financials are open, have always been" [2]
>>> >> - Later the same day, the same representative said that they were
>>> >> "working on posting all our materials to the wiki (...) Expect those
>>> >> late this week" [3]
>>> >> - Those statements now appear to be contradicted by the recent comment
>>> >> [1] that "there is no obligation" of LocationTech to share FOSS4G-NA
>>> >> financials
>>> >> My ongoing requests have thus far been an attempt to continue the
>>> >> conversation that originally took place on twitter on May 4th. As Marc
>>> >> said last night that he does not "communicate with people via twitter"
>>> >> [1], I'm more than happy to continue the public conversation with him
>>> >> or any relevant representative(s) here.
>>> >> [0a] https://twitter.com/sarasomewhere/status/1006304174332661760 [3]
>>> >> [0b] https://twitter.com/sarasomewhere/status/1001543441053114368 [4]
>>> >> [0c] https://twitter.com/sarasomewhere/status/994930635096641536 [5]
>>> >> [1] https://i.imgur.com/NlbXb4t.png [6]
>>> >> [2] https://twitter.com/TheaClay/status/992394814749577217 [7]
>>> >> [3] https://twitter.com/TheaClay/status/993584128279957504 [8]
>>> >> Regards,
>>> >> Sara Safavi _______________________________________________
>>> >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> >> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev [1]
>>> >> --
>>> >> Michael Terner
>>> >> ternergeo at gmail.com
>>> >> (M) 978-631-6602
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> >> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev [1]
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Cameron Shorter
>>> > Technology Demystifier
>>> > Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
>>> >
>>> > M +61 (0) 419 142 254
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> > Groups "foss4gna_selection" group.
>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> > an email to foss4gna_selection+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>> > To post to this group, send email to
>>> > foss4gna_selection at googlegroups.com.
>>> > To view this discussion on the web, visit
>>> >
>>> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/foss4gna_selection/CAF%2BW3R5DUHRdPoFR%3D-Z19WJug0FO7cybxGZHxq_fVxAfe9Hd8Q%40mail.gmail.com
>>> > [9].
>>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Links:
>>> > ------
>>> > [1] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>> > [2] https://twitter.com/GeoSkeptic/status/996147340854652928
>>> > [3] https://twitter.com/sarasomewhere/status/1006304174332661760
>>> > [4] https://twitter.com/sarasomewhere/status/1001543441053114368
>>> > [5] https://twitter.com/sarasomewhere/status/994930635096641536
>>> > [6] https://i.imgur.com/NlbXb4t.png
>>> > [7] https://twitter.com/TheaClay/status/992394814749577217
>>> > [8] https://twitter.com/TheaClay/status/993584128279957504
>>> > [9]
>>> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/foss4gna_selection/CAF%2BW3R5DUHRdPoFR%3D-Z19WJug0FO7cybxGZHxq_fVxAfe9Hd8Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "foss4gna_selection" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to foss4gna_selection+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to foss4gna_selection at googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web, visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/foss4gna_selection/CAF%2BW3R4iZu_CjyZFN2HAcZON%3Dma4LWgJ-d_Vx6F04BEXhy0nbQ%40mail.gmail.com.
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev