[OSGeo-Conf] Mailchimp
Codrina Maria Ilie
codrina at geo-spatial.org
Sat May 16 03:46:59 PDT 2020
Hi Malena, Maria,
In fact, the OSGeo board approved within this year's Conference
Committee budget the payment of the annual fee for Mailchimp [1].
I will put you, Malena, in contact with Mike, the OSGEeo Treasurer, to
set up the details for the payment.
Cheers,
Codrina
[1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Budget_2020
On 15/05/2020 23:24, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
> Stupid question maybe, but why does the LOC have to pay for this? Why is
> it not covered by OSGeo?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Bart
>
> On 15-05-2020 22:17, Malena Libman wrote:
>> Thank for your answer Eli.
>>
>> I think some of my answers are not as perfect in english as a thought
>> they where.
>>
>> I didn't mean we wanted to start to pay whenever we want, it's just
>> that with no income for at least 4 months and the need to relieve the
>> CLOC of the MailChimp expense now (the next charge is may 19th), we
>> don't have the money yet to cover this.
>>
>> As for the final comment, I also meant to agree with you, not to say
>> that the CC should do any of our work.
>>
>> Malena
>>
>>
>>
>> El vie., 15 may. 2020 a las 17:10, Eli Adam (<eadam at co.lincoln.or.us
>> <mailto:eadam at co.lincoln.or.us>>) escribió:
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:48 PM Malena Libman
>> <malena.libman at gmail.com <mailto:malena.libman at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > For the FOSS4G BALOC, the issue right now is that we don't have
>> the budget to support the mailchimp billing while we are not using it.
>>
>> My question was more of, "When does BALOC want to send messages?" And
>> not, "When does BALOC want to start paying for the service?" Many
>> years, the next LOC is very ready to start sending messages the
>> day/week after the prior FOSS4G and sometimes (with careful
>> coordination) before the prior event. If BALOC wants to start sending
>> messages in September (four months from now), we may want to just
>> leave it as is, even if BALOC doesn't yet take over payment of it.
>>
>> >
>> > We are working on locking the exact dates, but as long as we
>> don't launch the CFP or the ticket sales, we don't need the
>> mailing platform and it's imperative we reduce expenses
>> considering the pandemic situation world wide and the precarious
>> future of the conference.
>> >
>> > Thanks Steven for the suggestion on archive method, maybe that's
>> the best way to change the billing plan without downloading
>> information to avoid the concerns that Mark mentions or losing
>> important data.
>> >
>> > As Eli mentioned, it would be good for us (as LOC) to know
>> exactly which tasks are managed by the committee and which we need
>> to take care of.
>>
>> I think the typical approach is that the LOC does almost 100% of
>> everything and the Conference Committee does very little beyond the
>> initial selection and being available for guidance or advice or if
>> issues need input. My (not directly related to this thread) comment
>> was about whether we would ever want to reconsider that and establish
>> some long term continuity that does some of the routine conference
>> logistics. That was mere commentary on my part.
>>
>> Best regards, Eli
>>
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> >
>> > Malena
>> >
>> > El vie., 15 may. 2020 a las 16:29, Eli Adam
>> (<eadam at co.lincoln.or.us <mailto:eadam at co.lincoln.or.us>>) escribió:
>> >>
>> >> I have some hesitancy to ever be in the situation of "we can't send
>> >> emails to our list" which could happen if we plan to migrate
>> later (or
>> >> even, unarchive later). If there is some reliable method to
>> increase
>> >> and decrease expense that doesn't conflict with other uses of that
>> >> function, that might be worthwhile if some individual wants to
>> >> reliably take that on. Do we know when FOSS4G 2021 wants to start
>> >> sending messages?
>> >>
>> >> I'm also open to evaluating options like
>> https://phplist.com/pricing
>> >> if it were found to be equivalent (or better) and would support
>> open
>> >> source software while doing it. Generally, I think there is some
>> >> value to stability in things like this and we shouldn't be changing
>> >> too frequently. Any change should be done in coordination with
>> a LOC
>> >> (or if it were to be part of a more centrally managed service
>> by the
>> >> Conference Committee).
>> >>
>> >> For straight cost, +1 to what Darrell and Mark said. This cost is
>> >> minor in the big picture. Generally sysadmin time is one of
>> the more
>> >> scarce resources around OSGeo and I think that is best reserved for
>> >> other functions that can't easily be done otherwise/elsewhere. We
>> >> would need to talk to SAC before shifting responsibility of FOSS4G
>> >> emails going through correctly on tight timelines to them.
>> >>
>> >> More generally, evaluating which tasks are managed centrally by the
>> >> Conference Committee and which are shuffled from LOC to LOC
>> might be
>> >> worth a larger conversation (maybe on some other thread).
>> >>
>> >> Best regards, Eli
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 9:34 AM Darrell fuhriman
>> <darrell at garnix.org <mailto:darrell at garnix.org>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > My general feeling on these things is that it’s worth the
>> money to not put any more burden on volunteers than is necessary —
>> especially if that burden can be easily outsourced for what is
>> frankly a pretty small charge in the grand scheme of things.
>> >> >
>> >> > If you can revert to free and then upgrade as necessary, that
>> seems like an excellent investment to me.
>> >> >
>> >> > Darrell
>> >> >
>> >> > > On May 15, 2020, at 08:52, María Arias de Reyna
>> <delawen at gmail.com <mailto:delawen at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Dear Conference Committee,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > We just had a meeting with the Calgary team to give us the
>> credentials
>> >> > > of the shared accounts by all LOCs.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > We have a question regarding MailChimp. We understand this
>> is an
>> >> > > interesting tool that has been widely used in the past.
>> Right now it
>> >> > > has a cost of 93€/month.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Considering we are not going to widely use it in the next
>> few months,
>> >> > > we are going to export all the contacts to convert it to a
>> free plan
>> >> > > for the time being and then decide at a later stage what to
>> do with
>> >> > > it. Possibly reimport all the contacts and pay again, if
>> there is no
>> >> > > better alternative.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Can the Conference Committee discuss to have some FOSS
>> version of
>> >> > > this, like PHPList (https://github.com/phpList/phplist3 ),
>> on OSGeo
>> >> > > servers that will allow us to do the same without depending
>> on an
>> >> > > external provider?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Cheers,
>> >> > > María.
>> >> > > _______________________________________________
>> >> > > Conference_dev mailing list
>> >> > > Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>> >> > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Conference_dev mailing list
>> >> > Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>> >> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Conference_dev mailing list
>> >> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto: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
>
More information about the Conference_dev
mailing list