[OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] OSGeo is the host of FOSS4G not a guest

Mon Jul 3 04:12:15 PDT 2017

Hi Guido, thanks for your constructive contribution. 
Best wishes for "Boston 2017 presented by OSGeo"
Werner

--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 7/3/17, Guido Stein <guido at guidostein.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] OSGeo is the host of FOSS4G not a guest
 To: "Till Adams" <till.adams at fossgis.de>, discuss at lists.osgeo.org
 Date: Monday, July 3, 2017, 12:49 PM

 Good
 morning folks,
 First, I have
 no problem making adjustments to the website. It's not a
 big deal and can be done rather quickly.
 That said, I am a bit frustrated and
 disheartened by this conversation. The tone to me feels
 aggressive and discounts the reality of the work that the
 LOC has put into this. While Maxi just noticed this, the
 website and discussion about this choice has been had in the
 conference committee and codified in the RFP. To me, the
 urgency that is being put on this request is
 upsetting.
 I believe
 Maxi and anyone else should voice their opinions in public,
 but with 42 days left until the conference and with both a
 conference and marketing committee present and functional,
 it is a little painful to hear that "the
 community" as Maxi puts it (which in this thread
 represents 5 people ) think that we, the FOSS4G LOC, are not
 giving OSGeo its proper ?exposure? or ?title?.
 I have been working on this project
 for 2 years and we, the LOC, have been following all the
 guidance set out by the RFP and
 the conference committee. The RFP has this to say about what
 is required/requested:
     The conference name will be
 'FOSS4G 2017 presented by OSGeo'.

 This
 guidance has been a part of the website since it began and
 has been a part of the current design since the site took on
 it's current design in September. So the site has been
 up for about 12 months and the current design, which
 includes OSGeo as a Gold Sponsor has been up for 9
 months.
 The reason
 that OSGeo is listed under Gold Sponsor comes from a
 conversation on the conference dev list. In order to insure
 that OSGeo has clear privileges (booth, tickets, etc...) it
 was decided that OSGeo should be treated as a Gold Sponsor,
 which includes having their logo presented as such. To me,
 this does not suggest that their gold sponsor status is the
 only role they play.
 We, the LOC, have been incredibly
 honored to work on this project and hope that we represent
 the OSGeo community to the best of our ability. To be clear,
 no matter how the website is interpreted, OSGeo is at the
 center of all the work that the LOC has been doing. We, the
 LOC, have always made it clear that the FOSS4G is here to
 promote and support the OSGeo community of projects and
 local chapters. We, the LOC, have helped to bring new
 sponsors to the table and building new relationships to the
 OSGeo foundation. We have also helped to create
 opportunities to promote OSGeo at other events such as OSCON
 and the AAG. 
 I
 appreciate Maxi's concern on the positioning of
 OSGeo's brand and would like to work with him, the
 marketing committee, and the conference committee on making
 sure that the OSGeo brand is well placed. I would hope that
 Maxi and the rest of the community would realize that with
 42 days until the conference the LOC is hard at work with
 daily and sometimes hourly tasks focused on the event
 planning and logistics. I hope that between the marketing
 and conference committees that Maxi's concerns can be
 addressed and that the board does not have to weigh in on
 how the conference is run directly.
 Thank you all for your consideration
 and I look forward to seeing you in Boston,
 Guido
 SteinCo-ChairFOSS4G Boston 2017
 presented by OSGeo

 On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 5:02 AM Till Adams <till.adams at fossgis.de>
 wrote:
 Hi,

 I also agree with Maxi.

 I think the point we have to care about is that OSGeo is
 visible

 prominently on the F4G-conference-website and also during
 the

 conference. We put a strong focus on OSGeo-presence in
 2016.

 Till

 Am 03.07.2017 um 09:17 schrieb andrea antonello:

 > Hi all,

 > I completely agree with Massimiliano. There is a huge
 difference

 > between host and sponsor.

 >

 > That said, I understand Brad's points and also
 would never want for

 > this to end in additional costs.

 >

 > But this should be considered as something to keep well
 in mind.

 >

 > Regards,

 > Andrea

 >

 >

 >

 >

 >

 >

 >

 > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Puneet Kishor <punk.kish at gmail.com>
 wrote:

 >> As a (nominal) Charter Member, I personally
 couldn't care about this issue. As long as everyone
 involved is for the same higher purpose, who is sponsoring
 who or supporting what is just details. Move on and focus on
 the bigger tasks.

 >>

 >>> On Jul 2, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Brad Hards <bradh at frogmouth.net>
 wrote:

 >>>

 >>> Professor Cannata,

 >>>

 >>>> Your answer clarifies that OSGeo has not
 paid for being listed as sponsor.

 >>>>

 >>>> This doesn't change my idea that OSGeo
 shouldn't be listed as a sponsor an

 >>>> thus

 >>>>

 >>>> I renew my request to the board for
 removing OSGeo from that list and from

 >>>> any material listing OSGeo together (at the
 same level and/or same list of

 >>>> sponsors).

 >>>>

 >>>> That's because the marketing message it
 brings is clearly undesired and not

 >>>> respectful of the true.

 >>> I'm not a charter member or associated with
 the FOSS4G organisers, but having

 >>> attended a FOSS4G event and having been part of
 a volunteer conference

 >>> organisation, I respectfully ask that you
 reconsider. This is a very late

 >>> change to a lot of conference materials, and at
 a particularly bad time for

 >>> the organisers.

 >>>

 >>> In software terms, I'm not suggesting that
 your proposal isn't a valid change,

 >>> just that it is too late in the release
 cycle.

 >>>

 >>> If nothing else, consider the environmental
 impact of all that stuff being

 >>> junked.

 >>>

 >>> Brad

 >>>

 >>>

 >>>
 _______________________________________________

 >>> Discuss mailing list

 >>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org

 >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

 >> _______________________________________________

 >> Discuss mailing list

 >> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org

 >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

 > _______________________________________________

 > Discuss mailing list

 > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org

 > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

 _______________________________________________

 Discuss mailing list

 Discuss at lists.osgeo.org

 https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_______________________________________________
 Discuss mailing list
 Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
 https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss