[OSGeo-Conf] Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

[Eli Adam]

On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 3:21 AM, Till Adams <till.adams at fossgis.de> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> if this is an issue, let's handle it like this:
>
> - the bidding teams *can* send their proposal to me & someone else from CC
> (Guido? Michael?), if they want to get rid of it before the official
> deadline and if they fear publishing their proposal to the public earlier
> than other teams
>
>   - in that case the bidder posts only a submission-note on the ML
>
>   - if not, they are open to publish their proposal via the mailing list,
> just like it was the years before
>
> This does not apply for LoI's.
>
> Is that okay (I feel that we don't need a motion here)?

Sounds good to me and well within the purview of the chair or anyone
running the RfP.

Eli

>
> Till
>
>
>
>
> Am 17.09.2018 um 11:30 schrieb michael terner:
>
> +1
>
> I like the notion of an "email announcement" to the list stating "we have
> submitted and are ready for the next phase of Q&A".
>
> mt
>
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 2:41 PM Guido Stein <guido at guidostein.com> wrote:
>>
>> Good points,
>>
>> I think announcement that the proposal has been submitted makes sense.
>>
>> Guido
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018, 3:46 PM Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Till Adams <till.adams at fossgis.de>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Guido,
>>> >
>>> > Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I
>>> > think
>>> > that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until
>>> > we
>>> > are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible
>>> > for
>>> > people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their
>>> > competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared
>>> > proposal in the competitive bid.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Sounds reasonable.  I think that the old method was a combination of
>>> waiting until close to the deadline and thinking that if other LOCs
>>> need to look at yours, they've got no chance anyway.
>>>
>>> >
>>> > the 2 times I was involved, we had once only 1 proposal, for 2019 the
>>> > proposals came in within the last 2 hours of the period. So this was no
>>> > issue, but I see your point.
>>> >
>>> > In order to keep this fair also, we might have two people out of CC who
>>> > receive the proposals and these 2 have the duty to release them on the
>>> > list
>>> > when the proposal period ends. As chair, I can be one of these two.
>>>
>>> I would still like to require that the LOCs email the list before the
>>> deadline that they have turned in their proposals.  This ensures that
>>> they are subscribed to the mailing list, who speaks for the LOC,
>>> directs response questions and comments at them, etc.  It also lets
>>> them set the subject line and otherwise establish the groundwork for
>>> their bid.  It also publicly announces it before the deadline.  Then
>>> you or any designated third party can reply with the attachment after
>>> the deadline.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Till
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Does anyone have an objection to this?
>>> >
>>> > Guido
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <till.adams at fossgis.de>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Dear CC!
>>> >>
>>> >> We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:
>>> >>
>>> >> The draft RfP is
>>> >> at
>>> >>
>>> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing
>>> >>
>>> >> Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
>>> >> and comment.
>>> >>
>>> >> I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
>>> >> past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
>>> >> (14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
>>> >> we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.
>>> >>
>>> >> Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
>>> >> improvements on this document!
>>> >>
>>> >> Till
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> >> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Conference_dev mailing list
>>> > Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Conference_dev mailing list
>>> > Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev