[OSGeo-Conf] Poll: Change FOSS4G structure to have some continuity of organization and management

[Jeroen Ticheler]

Hi Maxi,
Thanks for sharing your view on this. Although I sympathize with the idea of a whole community having a say in how conference locations is selected and organized, I’m not in favor of the process you propose. Reading LOI’s and full proposals takes a lot of time and voting a lot of thought and discussion. It really helps to have previous conference organizers on the committee as well. At the same time I also think the committee should be open to other members (I used to be a member long time ago while I never chaired a conference, and I don’t think that mattered honestly).
Concluding, I think selecting a conference / proposal should be taken care of by the committee, not by all charter members or the whole community. Maybe the board or the charter members should decide for an elected committee similar to what we already do with the board elections.
Cheers,
Jeroen

Jeroen Ticheler
Mobile: +31681286572
E-mail: jeroen.ticheler at geocat.net
https://www.geocat.net
Veenderweg 13
6721 WD Bennekom
The Netherlands
Tel: +31318416664
On 3 Feb 2022, 16:15 +0100, Massimiliano Cannata <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>, wrote:
> Dear conference community,
> why is the community left out from this decision / discussion?
>
> The FOSS4G conference is a property of OSGeo, and therefore of the community as a whole.
> The conference committee has not been elected so cannot decide in representation of the community.
>
> As an OPEN community I strongly believe that all the charter members (at least) should have a word or vote on such an important decision.
>
> I hope this message is not ignored..
>
> Maxi
>
>
>
> > Il giorno gio 3 feb 2022 alle ore 15:04 Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> ha scritto:
> > > Hi all (particularly voting committee members),
> > >
> > > The current FOSS4G structure has a new LOC every year starting more or less from scratch (some things like mailing lists and seed money are passed on).  Over the years, many people have commented on the load of work this creates for the LOC, the general inefficiency, the risk, and the burnout.
> > >
> > > If you consider yourself a voting member of the committee (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Conference_Committee#Current_Members), please indicate your preference on this.
> > >
> > > This is an informal poll to see if the conference committee wants to:
> > > 1. Keep it the way it is and not change anything
> > > 2. Change the FOSS4G organizing structure to something else (discussion of what we change it to can come later if people want to pursue this).
> > >
> > > As I've expressed several times, I prefer option 2, changing the FOSS4G organizing structure.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your time and participation.
> > >
> > > Best regards, Eli
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Conference_dev mailing list
> > > Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
> --
> Massimiliano Cannata
> Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica
> Responsabile settore Geomatica
>
> Istituto scienze della Terra
> Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design
> Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana
> Campus Mendrisio, Via Flora Ruchat-Roncati 15
> CH – 6850 Mendrisio
> Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14
> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09
> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
> www.supsi.ch/ist
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20220203/a76290d6/attachment-0001.html>