[OSGeo-Conf] Draft RfP FOSS4G2022

[Mark Iliffe]

Hi All,

I've read the proposal and want to commend the drafting team, it is much
more comprehensive and will provide much more guidance to LOCs heading on
their journey. I agree with the proposal that the 2022 FOSS4G should be
convened in NA, while I am hopeful of heading to Argentina next year (and
have willingly supported it through getting a ticket!), I severely doubt
that we will be in a place to have the FOSS4G experience as we would have
hoped for - but this is my purely personal opinion and offer my
full-throated support and endorsement to the efforts of the 2021 FOSS4G and
the LOC, however, I believe that the uncertainty will still abide.

With this in mind, has the Committee considered the longer-term potential
impact of not 'balancing the books'? Or should we? As the co-Chair of the
Dar es Salaam, our objective was to break even - we scraped it in the final
two weeks. With Calgary 2020 down, we're heading into the next iteration of
the RoW, with the 'break-even' considered (from my current understanding)
as the optimal scenario. Is there a decision point that we need to make
here?

Cheers,

Mark



On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 at 11:45, Peter Batty <peter at ebatty.com> wrote:

> Hi all, just looking back on the email threads, in the conversation around
> the cancellation of the Calgary event, there were some suggestions that the
> 2022 event should be held in North America, so we don't go so long without
> having an event there, and also that we should offer the right of
> first refusal to the Calgary team, so if they wanted to run the 2022 event
> we could elect to award it to them without a competitive RFP (probably
> subject to submitting some updated plans for review). At the time
> the Calgary team weren't sure if they would want to do it again,
> understandably due to the situation, but they didn't rule it out. I don't
> know if I missed any subsequent discussion on this front.
>
> Personally I would support first offering the Calgary team the right of
> first refusal on the 2022 event. If they decide they don't want to do it,
> then we need to decide whether the location for 2022 should be North
> America (which means we would go 5 years between NA events, 4 years between
> European events) or Europe (6 years between NA events, 3 years between
> European events).
>
> Cheers,
>     Peter.
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 8:20 AM Till Adams <till.adams at fossgis.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi Vasile,
>>
>> I added just two comments. In general I woulde also suggest to have a
>> WIKI page with just the most important infos about the bidding process,
>> like we had in the past [1]. This in order to keep the process open and
>> transparent.
>>
>> Till
>>
>> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_2021_Bid_Process
>>
>>
>> Am 09.11.20 um 23:31 schrieb Vasile Craciunescu:
>> > Dear CC members,
>> >
>> > It's true, these days the world is holding its breath waiting for a
>> > solution to the current COVID-19 pandemic. It's also true that the
>> > present offers no certainties for the near future (the reason we kept
>> > postponing this message). However, it's time to make some decisions
>> > regarding FOSS4G2022. Therefore, we kindly ask your opinion on the new
>> > proposed draft for the FOSS4G2022 bid. Please take a look at the
>> > document and add your comments/suggestions. The important
>> > additions/changes from the last document editions are highlighted in
>> orange.
>> >
>> >
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P3OJpJeC6LrWR7lpboBEHVdR7tihsid7a6wDIZOixZA/edit?usp=sharing
>> >
>> > Warm regards,
>> >
>> > Vasile & Msilikale - with kind support from Steven.
>> > CC Co-chairs
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20201110/0b63cd84/attachment-0001.html>