From tylermitchell at shaw.ca  Thu Feb  1 11:31:45 2007
From: tylermitchell at shaw.ca (Tyler Mitchell)
Date: Thu Feb  1 12:29:19 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
Message-ID: <E81A5565-48DD-4E27-A109-D9AEE2BA2482@shaw.ca>

There has been some confusion brought up in the media and by our  
project sponsors, wondering why all of the sponsors (foundation +  
project) don't appear on:
http://www.osgeo.org/sponsors

I know our reasoning is to maximise exposure for foundation level  
sponsors.  I wonder if others agree with me that having a simple text  
link to the various project sponsorship pages would be helpful for  
clearing this up - without compromising the value of that page.

For example, in the top paragraph or so of http://www.osgeo.org/ 
sponsors we add a short section like this that points to each  
project's credits page:
Project Sponsors: <a href="http://gdal.org/credits.html">GDAL/OGR</a>

Make sense?
From mpg at lizardtech.com  Thu Feb  1 11:35:11 2007
From: mpg at lizardtech.com (Michael P. Gerlek)
Date: Thu Feb  1 12:31:30 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
In-Reply-To: <E81A5565-48DD-4E27-A109-D9AEE2BA2482@shaw.ca>
References: <E81A5565-48DD-4E27-A109-D9AEE2BA2482@shaw.ca>
Message-ID: <DBEC881B4E22D1449F5FAC530E1ADD1201114E67@sea-srv-ms3.lizardtech.com>

+1

-mpg

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: fundraising-bounces@lists.osgeo.org 
> [mailto:fundraising-bounces@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of 
> Tyler Mitchell
> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 8:32 AM
> To: OSGeo Fundraising List
> Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
> 
> There has been some confusion brought up in the media and by our  
> project sponsors, wondering why all of the sponsors (foundation +  
> project) don't appear on:
> http://www.osgeo.org/sponsors
> 
> I know our reasoning is to maximise exposure for foundation level  
> sponsors.  I wonder if others agree with me that having a 
> simple text  
> link to the various project sponsorship pages would be helpful for  
> clearing this up - without compromising the value of that page.
> 
> For example, in the top paragraph or so of http://www.osgeo.org/ 
> sponsors we add a short section like this that points to each  
> project's credits page:
> Project Sponsors: <a href="http://gdal.org/credits.html">GDAL/OGR</a>
> 
> Make sense?
> _______________________________________________
> Fundraising mailing list
> Fundraising@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fundraising
> 
From warmerdam at pobox.com  Thu Feb  1 11:55:19 2007
From: warmerdam at pobox.com (Frank Warmerdam)
Date: Thu Feb  1 12:52:01 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
In-Reply-To: <E81A5565-48DD-4E27-A109-D9AEE2BA2482@shaw.ca>
References: <E81A5565-48DD-4E27-A109-D9AEE2BA2482@shaw.ca>
Message-ID: <45C21B77.5070206@pobox.com>

Tyler Mitchell wrote:
> There has been some confusion brought up in the media and by our project 
> sponsors, wondering why all of the sponsors (foundation + project) don't 
> appear on:
> http://www.osgeo.org/sponsors
> 
> I know our reasoning is to maximise exposure for foundation level 
> sponsors.  I wonder if others agree with me that having a simple text 
> link to the various project sponsorship pages would be helpful for 
> clearing this up - without compromising the value of that page.
> 
> For example, in the top paragraph or so of http://www.osgeo.org/sponsors 
> we add a short section like this that points to each project's credits 
> page:
> Project Sponsors: <a href="http://gdal.org/credits.html">GDAL/OGR</a>
> 
> Make sense?

Tyler,

+1 - But I think these should come after the foundation sponsors, not before.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

From Jason.Birch at nanaimo.ca  Thu Feb  1 12:06:38 2007
From: Jason.Birch at nanaimo.ca (Jason Birch)
Date: Thu Feb  1 13:02:54 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
Message-ID: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>

FrankW wrote:

---------------
+1 - But I think these should come after the foundation sponsors, not
before.
---------------

If we're going to do this for projects do we need to do it for local
chapters too?

If so, I'd suggest something like (under the main sponsorship section):

<p>Various OSGeo projects and local chapters have their own sponsors.
Please find links to these below:</p>
<p><strong>Project Sponsor Pages</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><a href="...">GDAL/OGR</a></li>
<li>...</a></li>
</ul>

<p><strong>Local Chapter Sponsor Pages</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><a href="...">OSGeo Japan</a></li>
<li>...</a></li>
</ul>

Jason
From mpg at lizardtech.com  Thu Feb  1 12:09:24 2007
From: mpg at lizardtech.com (Michael P. Gerlek)
Date: Thu Feb  1 13:05:41 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
In-Reply-To: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>
References: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>
Message-ID: <DBEC881B4E22D1449F5FAC530E1ADD1201114E77@sea-srv-ms3.lizardtech.com>

-0, because now I'm starting to worry about "dilution" of the page with
too many listings...?

-mpg

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: fundraising-bounces@lists.osgeo.org 
> [mailto:fundraising-bounces@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 9:07 AM
> To: Fundraising Committee
> Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
> 
> FrankW wrote:
> 
> ---------------
> +1 - But I think these should come after the foundation sponsors, not
> before.
> ---------------
> 
> If we're going to do this for projects do we need to do it for local
> chapters too?
> 
> If so, I'd suggest something like (under the main sponsorship 
> section):
> 
> <p>Various OSGeo projects and local chapters have their own sponsors.
> Please find links to these below:</p>
> <p><strong>Project Sponsor Pages</strong></p>
> <ul>
> <li><a href="...">GDAL/OGR</a></li>
> <li>...</a></li>
> </ul>
> 
> <p><strong>Local Chapter Sponsor Pages</strong></p>
> <ul>
> <li><a href="...">OSGeo Japan</a></li>
> <li>...</a></li>
> </ul>
> 
> Jason
> _______________________________________________
> Fundraising mailing list
> Fundraising@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fundraising
> 
From tylermitchell at shaw.ca  Thu Feb  1 12:09:18 2007
From: tylermitchell at shaw.ca (Tyler Mitchell)
Date: Thu Feb  1 13:07:32 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
In-Reply-To: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>
References: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>
Message-ID: <542BE81F-F5FF-4370-99BD-4061D8A01DEF@shaw.ca>

> ---------------
> +1 - But I think these should come after the foundation sponsors, not
> before.
> ---------------
>
> If we're going to do this for projects do we need to do it for local
> chapters too?

Makes sense to me...
From warmerdam at pobox.com  Thu Feb  1 12:23:12 2007
From: warmerdam at pobox.com (Frank Warmerdam)
Date: Thu Feb  1 13:19:26 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
In-Reply-To: <DBEC881B4E22D1449F5FAC530E1ADD1201114E77@sea-srv-ms3.lizardtech.com>
References: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>
	<DBEC881B4E22D1449F5FAC530E1ADD1201114E77@sea-srv-ms3.lizardtech.com>
Message-ID: <45C22200.3050003@pobox.com>

Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> -0, because now I'm starting to worry about "dilution" of the page with
> too many listings...?

Michael,

I think it is important to give primacy to foundation level sponsors on
this page - achieved I hope by putting them first, and providing logos
for each as opposed to single text links for each project/chapter group
of other kinds of sponsors.

But one thing to keep in mind is that showing lots of sponsors supporting
the foundation, foundation projects and foundation chapters helps build a
sense of broad support and excitement.

I am concerned about dilution of the promotional benefits of being a
foundation level sponsor though.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

From tylermitchell at shaw.ca  Thu Feb  1 12:21:32 2007
From: tylermitchell at shaw.ca (Tyler Mitchell)
Date: Thu Feb  1 13:28:03 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
In-Reply-To: <DBEC881B4E22D1449F5FAC530E1ADD1201114E77@sea-srv-ms3.lizardtech.com>
References: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>
	<DBEC881B4E22D1449F5FAC530E1ADD1201114E77@sea-srv-ms3.lizardtech.com>
Message-ID: <F290A722-6998-4156-96C6-0AEFCBBA8EBC@shaw.ca>

The rationale is essentially to show the outside world that there are  
noteworthy people giving us money and, if they dig deep enough, they  
can find out who.  The foundation level sponsors are clear and I  
don't want to dilute it further.  But if we keep the links relegated  
to the footer of that page, i.e. in "for more information" it can be  
less intrusive.  With that in mind perhaps we can avoid creating  
whole new 'sections' on the page, and just add links that are a  
couple words or more like:

...
For more information
Other sponsors support particular OSGeo projects: <a>GDAL/OGR</a>.   
To sponsor OSGeo or discuss sponsorship opportunities further, please  
contact:

...

We can deal with local chapter sponsors when the time comes, or do  
you think it is imminent?

Tyler

On 1-Feb-07, at 9:09 AM, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:

> -0, because now I'm starting to worry about "dilution" of the page  
> with
> too many listings...?
>
> -mpg
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: fundraising-bounces@lists.osgeo.org
>> [mailto:fundraising-bounces@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
>> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 9:07 AM
>> To: Fundraising Committee
>> Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
>>
>> FrankW wrote:
>>
>> ---------------
>> +1 - But I think these should come after the foundation sponsors, not
>> before.
>> ---------------
>>
>> If we're going to do this for projects do we need to do it for local
>> chapters too?
>>
>> If so, I'd suggest something like (under the main sponsorship
>> section):
>>
>> <p>Various OSGeo projects and local chapters have their own sponsors.
>> Please find links to these below:</p>
>> <p><strong>Project Sponsor Pages</strong></p>
>> <ul>
>> <li><a href="...">GDAL/OGR</a></li>
>> <li>...</a></li>
>> </ul>
>>
>> <p><strong>Local Chapter Sponsor Pages</strong></p>
>> <ul>
>> <li><a href="...">OSGeo Japan</a></li>
>> <li>...</a></li>
>> </ul>
>>
>> Jason
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fundraising mailing list
>> Fundraising@lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fundraising
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Fundraising mailing list
> Fundraising@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fundraising

From warmerdam at pobox.com  Thu Feb  1 12:35:33 2007
From: warmerdam at pobox.com (Frank Warmerdam)
Date: Thu Feb  1 13:31:44 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
In-Reply-To: <F290A722-6998-4156-96C6-0AEFCBBA8EBC@shaw.ca>
References: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>
	<DBEC881B4E22D1449F5FAC530E1ADD1201114E77@sea-srv-ms3.lizardtech.com>
	<F290A722-6998-4156-96C6-0AEFCBBA8EBC@shaw.ca>
Message-ID: <45C224E5.9040105@pobox.com>

Tyler Mitchell wrote:
> The rationale is essentially to show the outside world that there are 
> noteworthy people giving us money and, if they dig deep enough, they can 
> find out who.  The foundation level sponsors are clear and I don't want 
> to dilute it further.  But if we keep the links relegated to the footer 
> of that page, i.e. in "for more information" it can be less intrusive.  
> With that in mind perhaps we can avoid creating whole new 'sections' on 
> the page, and just add links that are a couple words or more like:
> 
> ...
> For more information
> Other sponsors support particular OSGeo projects: <a>GDAL/OGR</a>.  To 
> sponsor OSGeo or discuss sponsorship opportunities further, please contact:

Tyler,

I like keeping it reasonably low key.

> We can deal with local chapter sponsors when the time comes, or do you 
> think it is imminent?

I don't think there are any chapter sponsor pages to point to yet so the
problem isn't immediate.  But I do think we should be addressing this as
part of the "local chapter sponsors" discussion.  That is, how much
representation do local chapter sponsors get at the foundation level.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

From rajan at iiit.ac.in  Fri Feb  2 00:06:06 2007
From: rajan at iiit.ac.in (K S Rajan)
Date: Fri Feb  2 01:02:41 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
References: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>	<DBEC881B4E22D1449F5FAC530E1ADD1201114E77@sea-srv-ms3.lizardtech.com>	<F290A722-6998-4156-96C6-0AEFCBBA8EBC@shaw.ca>
	<45C224E5.9040105@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <45C2C6BE.7040801@iiit.ac.in>

+1 - I do support the idea of links to the relevant pages.

FYI, India Chapter has started working on getting sponsorship or seed 
funding from domestic sources - government and industry. They may be 
either event based support or to the chapter as a whole. I am not sure 
yet, but thinking aloud, Govt., agencies may be listed only on the 
Chapter page and not willing to listed on the OSGeo.org, whereas 
Industry might.

Regards,
Rajan

Frank Warmerdam wrote:

> Tyler Mitchell wrote:
>
>> The rationale is essentially to show the outside world that there are 
>> noteworthy people giving us money and, if they dig deep enough, they 
>> can find out who.  The foundation level sponsors are clear and I 
>> don't want to dilute it further.  But if we keep the links relegated 
>> to the footer of that page, i.e. in "for more information" it can be 
>> less intrusive.  With that in mind perhaps we can avoid creating 
>> whole new 'sections' on the page, and just add links that are a 
>> couple words or more like:
>>
>> ...
>> For more information
>> Other sponsors support particular OSGeo projects: <a>GDAL/OGR</a>.  
>> To sponsor OSGeo or discuss sponsorship opportunities further, please 
>> contact:
>
>
> Tyler,
>
> I like keeping it reasonably low key.
>
>> We can deal with local chapter sponsors when the time comes, or do 
>> you think it is imminent?
>
>
> I don't think there are any chapter sponsor pages to point to yet so the
> problem isn't immediate.  But I do think we should be addressing this as
> part of the "local chapter sponsors" discussion.  That is, how much
> representation do local chapter sponsors get at the foundation level.
>
> Best regards,




From rajan at iiit.ac.in  Fri Feb  2 00:06:43 2007
From: rajan at iiit.ac.in (K S Rajan)
Date: Fri Feb  2 01:03:11 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
References: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>	<DBEC881B4E22D1449F5FAC530E1ADD1201114E77@sea-srv-ms3.lizardtech.com>	<F290A722-6998-4156-96C6-0AEFCBBA8EBC@shaw.ca>
	<45C224E5.9040105@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <45C2C6E3.7050805@iiit.ac.in>

+1 - I do support the idea of links to the relevant pages.

FYI, India Chapter is working on getting sponsorship or seed funding 
from domestic sources - government and industry. They may be either 
event based support or to the chapter as a whole. I am not sure yet, but 
thinking aloud, Govt., agencies may be listed only on the Chapter page 
and not willing to listed on the OSGeo.org, whereas Industry might.

Regards,
Rajan

Frank Warmerdam wrote:

> Tyler Mitchell wrote:
>
>> The rationale is essentially to show the outside world that there are 
>> noteworthy people giving us money and, if they dig deep enough, they 
>> can find out who.  The foundation level sponsors are clear and I 
>> don't want to dilute it further.  But if we keep the links relegated 
>> to the footer of that page, i.e. in "for more information" it can be 
>> less intrusive.  With that in mind perhaps we can avoid creating 
>> whole new 'sections' on the page, and just add links that are a 
>> couple words or more like:
>>
>> ...
>> For more information
>> Other sponsors support particular OSGeo projects: <a>GDAL/OGR</a>.  
>> To sponsor OSGeo or discuss sponsorship opportunities further, please 
>> contact:
>
>
> Tyler,
>
> I like keeping it reasonably low key.
>
>> We can deal with local chapter sponsors when the time comes, or do 
>> you think it is imminent?
>
>
> I don't think there are any chapter sponsor pages to point to yet so the
> problem isn't immediate.  But I do think we should be addressing this as
> part of the "local chapter sponsors" discussion.  That is, how much
> representation do local chapter sponsors get at the foundation level.
>
> Best regards,




From venka.osgeo at gmail.com  Fri Feb  2 00:33:21 2007
From: venka.osgeo at gmail.com (venka.osgeo)
Date: Fri Feb  2 01:29:37 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Link to project sponsors
In-Reply-To: <45C2C6E3.7050805@iiit.ac.in>
References: <8E468917B01800408B91984428BE03DD058531F5@starfish.nanaimo.ca>	<DBEC881B4E22D1449F5FAC530E1ADD1201114E77@sea-srv-ms3.lizardtech.com>	<F290A722-6998-4156-96C6-0AEFCBBA8EBC@shaw.ca>	<45C224E5.9040105@pobox.com>
	<45C2C6E3.7050805@iiit.ac.in>
Message-ID: <45C2CD21.5010808@gmail.com>

Local Chapters had their own URL
(e.g. india.osgeo.org, japan.osgeo.org etc.)
when OSGeo was using Collabnet. Is this
going to be discontinued with the
migration to Drupal?

If local chapters are going to have independent
website (not as a part of OSGeo infrastructure
support from OSGeo), maybe listing local chapter
sponsors on local chapter page would make sense.
With the migration to Drupal, the local chapter
pages are on the OSGeo wiki only.

For example the China OSGeo chapter has registered
the Domain http://www.osgeo.org.cn
and are putting up contents in Chinese on their site.

Regards

Venka


K S Rajan wrote:
> +1 - I do support the idea of links to the relevant pages.
> 
> FYI, India Chapter is working on getting sponsorship or seed funding 
> from domestic sources - government and industry. They may be either 
> event based support or to the chapter as a whole. I am not sure yet, but 
> thinking aloud, Govt., agencies may be listed only on the Chapter page 
> and not willing to listed on the OSGeo.org, whereas Industry might.
> 
> Regards,
> Rajan
> 
> Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> 
>> Tyler Mitchell wrote:
>>
>>> The rationale is essentially to show the outside world that there are 
>>> noteworthy people giving us money and, if they dig deep enough, they 
>>> can find out who.  The foundation level sponsors are clear and I 
>>> don't want to dilute it further.  But if we keep the links relegated 
>>> to the footer of that page, i.e. in "for more information" it can be 
>>> less intrusive.  With that in mind perhaps we can avoid creating 
>>> whole new 'sections' on the page, and just add links that are a 
>>> couple words or more like:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> For more information
>>> Other sponsors support particular OSGeo projects: <a>GDAL/OGR</a>.  
>>> To sponsor OSGeo or discuss sponsorship opportunities further, please 
>>> contact:
>>
>>
>> Tyler,
>>
>> I like keeping it reasonably low key.
>>
>>> We can deal with local chapter sponsors when the time comes, or do 
>>> you think it is imminent?
>>
>>
>> I don't think there are any chapter sponsor pages to point to yet so the
>> problem isn't immediate.  But I do think we should be addressing this as
>> part of the "local chapter sponsors" discussion.  That is, how much
>> representation do local chapter sponsors get at the foundation level.
>>
>> Best regards,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Fundraising mailing list
> Fundraising@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fundraising
> 

From warmerdam at pobox.com  Sat Feb  3 11:10:34 2007
From: warmerdam at pobox.com (Frank Warmerdam)
Date: Sat Feb  3 12:06:34 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Local Sponsorships
Message-ID: <45C4B3FA.5080908@pobox.com>

Folks,

A week or two ago I indicated on the discuss list that Venka and I would
like to open up discussions here with the Fundraising committee on how
local chapter sponsorships should be handle.

Venka has prepared an initial document specifying what we do now with regard
to "Foundation Sponsorship", "Project Sponsorship", and "Conference
Sponsorship".  All these are formal programs handled by the foundation in some
fashion.  His document also collects various information and thoughts about
how local sponsorships might be handled, though this aspect is what we need
to flesh out, and come to some agreement on.  The document is at:

   http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/Local_Chapter_Sponsorship

I have asked representatives of the various local chapters to join this
list so they can speak up on behalf of what would be useful, and acceptable
to them.  Please do speak up!

I will outline a few of my questions and concerns:

  1) Which chapters are wanting to solicit local funding for local activities?

  2) The "Project Sponsorship" program is designed such that 75% of the sponsor
     funds are put into a reserve fund for use of the project, and 25% are put
     into OSGeo general income to support the project less directly.   Is this
     25% slice for general foundation use going to be acceptable to local
     chapters?

  3) To what extent are chapters willing to have their local sponsorship efforts
     bound by foundation level rules?  For instance, foundation level sponsors
     do not get any control over how their funds are spent.  Are local sponsors
     willing to live by such a rule?

  4) Are local chapters willing to provide a detailed accounting of all
     financial activity to the central foundation for review?  This might be
     expected if local sponsorship funds are routed through OSGeo as a minimum
     level of diligence on the foundation's part.

  5) What level of promotional support do local chapters want/expect from the
     foundation?

---

Briefly, my original assumption with regard to local chapters is that local
chapters wanting to solicit local sponsorship could develop and operate a
local sponsorship program roughly as they wish.  The local chapters would be
responsible for administering them locally, and would not be subject to OSGeo
rules beyond our general expectation that local chapters operate responsibly
and within the general principles of the foundation.  Conversely, the central
foundation would not be vetting these programs, not claiming any degree of
responsibility for them.   We also wouldn't be particularly actively promoting
local sponsorship.

However, there seems to be substantial interest in a closer association between
the fundraising efforts of some local chapters and the central foundation.
This discussion can hopefully open up thoughts on how that might work and
how advisable it is.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

From arnulf.christl at wheregroup.com  Mon Feb  5 13:35:09 2007
From: arnulf.christl at wheregroup.com (Arnulf Christl)
Date: Mon Feb  5 14:31:59 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Local Sponsorships (was: Re: [Board] conference
	naming?)
In-Reply-To: <CFF3C71613AD464B97B9BA232E2461720597BD8A@msgusawmb01.ads.autodesk.com>
References: <45C615D7.6020006@gotog.net>
	<45C678A7.6080609@pobox.com><CFF3C71613AD464B97B9BA232E2461720597BD81@msgusawmb01.ads.autodesk.com>
	<45C700A1.20108@wheregroup.com>
	<CFF3C71613AD464B97B9BA232E2461720597BD8A@msgusawmb01.ads.autodesk.com>
Message-ID: <45C778DD.3010208@wheregroup.com>

Gary Lang wrote:
> I see.
> 
> I don't know what to think about it, except to say that if diluting the 
> OSGeo brand helps promote free geospatial software, then it was a good 
> idea. If not, it was not. I will assume that this was thought through 
> and a decision made accordingly.

This was discussed and I take it that FOSS4G will be a "product" of OSGeo. Just like the software stack might become or our meta data service or the www portal. So it will strengthen the brand OSGeo for what it is and profit from the existing product FOSS4G. imho and all that.

Maybe the "OSGeo conference" will eventually also come into existence but I imagine that it would be more like 30 so people who do all the internal shit jobs. :-)

> An _open source geospatial_ conference, regardless of the foundation 
> name, sounds like a good thing, I would think. Who is "FOSS"? Do I send 
> them money to help keep FOSS going? etc.

Yes, you got the message. Send money to FOSS and IT will be good to you. 

We have collected money by sponsors with the FOSSGIS conference in Germany to fund the venue itself and some other expenses. End of 2006 we sponsored a profit of ?10k that we made with the conferences to the GAV e.V. (GRASS Anwender-Vereinigung legal non-profit in Germany) who is friendly with OSGeo. At a later stage this should become a formal association but no one around here did this before, dito for OSGeo. This means we are making money with the "product" FOSSGIS (says me who wants to keep it all revenue neutral and low cost and still always ends up with some surplus. Darn). So we "donated" this money to be spent by the OSGeo Local Chapter Deutsch. But Local Chapter Deutsch doesn't exist yet. 

The money is earmarked to be spent "OSGeo and FOSS GIS related". It will be spent in Germany for events, printing brochures, booths, caps, t-shirts, advertisements, whatnot. Whatever OSGeo VisCom and VisCom-DE think makes sense. Do you think that a share of that money should end up on your OSGeo account? With what reasoning (I will have to explain this to the local chaps here)?

I am still chewing on Local Chapter Sponsorship issues but can't get a grip on it. 

This is a FunCom thing really. Good that I am not on that committee, else I would get mixed up all the time. 

:-)

Best regards, 
Arnulf. 

> Gary
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:   board-bounces@lists.osgeo.org on behalf of Arnulf Christl
> Sent:   Mon 2/5/2007 2:02 AM
> To:     board@lists.osgeo.org
> Cc:    
> Subject:        Re: [Board] conference naming?
> 
> Gary Lang wrote:
>  > I missed that. Where is the minutes of that meeting?
>  >
>  > Thx
> 
> Start here to get the full story:
> http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2006-November/thread.html
> 
> Guess what, I was part of the subversive group that tries to dilute the 
> OSGeo brand name and I could not refrain from having a strong position 
> in favor of having the term Free in the title. So if you need to blame 
> somebody for supporting such a stupid idea blame me. And next time join 
> the discussion in time... ;-)
> 
> Best regards,
> Arnulf.
> 
>  > -----Original Message-----
>  > From:   board-bounces@lists.osgeo.org on behalf of Frank Warmerdam
>  > (External)
>  > Sent:   Sun 2/4/2007 4:21 PM
>  > To:     Chris Holmes
>  > Cc:     board@lists.osgeo.org
>  > Subject:        Re: [Board] conference naming?
>  >
>  > Chris Holmes wrote:
>  >  > This is kind of random, but weren't we going to call the next 
> conference
>  >  > the OSGeo conference?  As that was the name the year before, and 
> it also
>  >  > fits with our name, becomes our thing?  But it looks like it's become
>  >  > foss4g again - http://www.foss4g2007.org/.  Was that a conscious
>  > decision?
>  >
>  > Chris,
>  >
>  > This was the product of a rather heated debate, followed by a vote by
>  > the conference committee.  So yes, it was a conscious decision.
>  >
>  > Best regards,
>  > --
>  > 
> ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
>  > I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
>  > warmerdam@pobox.com
>  > light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
>  > and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, 
> http://osgeo.org
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > Board mailing list
>  > Board@lists.osgeo.org
>  > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>  >
>  >
>  > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > Board mailing list
>  > Board@lists.osgeo.org
>  > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> 

From warmerdam at pobox.com  Thu Feb  8 15:01:55 2007
From: warmerdam at pobox.com (Frank Warmerdam)
Date: Thu Feb  8 11:59:36 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Re: [intl-discuss] the last issue of this list
	(maybe)
In-Reply-To: <45CB21CB.5000404@ominiverdi.com>
References: <45CB21CB.5000404@ominiverdi.com>
Message-ID: <45CB81B3.7030901@pobox.com>

Lorenzo Becchi wrote:
> I see a keypoint on this:
> 13:36:32    FrankW:     ominoverde: I do get the point that we may need 
> to revisit what rules we expect a local chapter to abide by to avoid 
> future problems. But I'm not *leading* any action on that front.
> 
> I understand that Frank cannot have time to moderate every discussion.
> It would be nice if a good support will come from us, local chapters 
> interested people, and if we can define some more clear rules on how 
> Local Chapters should be.

Lorenzo,

My point wasn't so much that I don't have time, but rather that I think
someone with a firmer idea of what they think we ought to do should be
leading such an effort.

Based on the discussion we had yesterday I can more clearly see some
dangers of a relatively loose approach to how local chapters are administered.
However, I'm still quite worried that a fairly restrictive policy will
have negative ramifications.

For me, I'm especially worried about folks forming an OSGeo chapter in
regions that already have a strong open source geospatial group and this
leading to a sort of community split of some sort.  Even if the groups
are cooperative there will be a dilution of efforts, and it is very easy
for such a situation to lead to bad feelings that would be damaging to
all our goals.

What I could imagine is OSGeo having fairly strict rules for what constitutes
an official local chapter, but also have a looser concept of affiliated
organizations.  So, for instance, in Germany the GAV e.V. has existed for some
time, and has essentially the same goals as OSGeo.  Rather than have a
"competing" OSGeo chapter start there, we might instead treat GAV e.V.
as an affiliated group and refer folks interested in local action and support
to them.

So in this scenario the local chapters page might instead become the "local
organizations" page, and list both official OSGeo chapters and other affiliated
organizations.  The chapters would be subject to fairly strict rules, while
we would just need to ensure that the affiliated groups share closely
related goals.

In this scenario I'd feel more comfortable adding some additional rules
for local chapters.  They might include things like:
  o local chapter members are automatically general members of OSGeo which
    implies we register them properly with contact info, etc.
  o local chapters would need to follow some sort of code of conduct with
    regard to handling of chapter funds.
  o local chapters who wish to have corporate sponsors would need to do so
    under a "standardized local chapter program", perhaps a bit like the
    OSGeo Project Sponsorship program (except that the money presumably
    would not be routed through the main foundation).

In places where groups don't feel comfortable with such outside interference
interested individuals could just launch a local GFOSS type group that doesn't
use the OSGeo name for itself, and seek affiliation with OSGeo rather than
being a formal local chapter.

All the above said, I'm still somewhat ambivalent about the whole matter.  If
something is to happen someone who feels more strongly about it than I will
need to lead the effort.

PS. I can't help but wonder if this discussion should be on discuss since
it is of wide interest.  Having it here, while appropriate to the purpose
of the list, will tend to limit involvement in the discussion to the few
who knew to join this list.  I would have no objection to my email being
taken to the main discuss list if folks want to move the discussion there.

PPS. I'm bcc'ing fundraising and board since these discussion relate closely
to nacent discussions on the fundraising list about local sponsorship, and
because ultimately it will be the board that would have to put in rules.
But I *hate* cross posting storms so hopefully the bcc will keep the actual
discussion in one place.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

From warmerdam at pobox.com  Sun Feb 25 20:41:58 2007
From: warmerdam at pobox.com (Frank Warmerdam)
Date: Sun Feb 25 21:36:51 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Sponsorship Spreadsheet
Message-ID: <45E23AE6.8040504@pobox.com>

Folks,

The FOSS4G conference committee quite successfully used a google spreadsheet
document as a way of collaborating on sponsorship prospects, and status. So
I have created a similar document for general OSGeo sponsorship, and I'd
be happy to share it with any members of the committee or folks interesting
in pursuing sponsors.  However, it at least mildly sensative so I'd prefer
it not be completely public.

Please email me the appropriate email address you would like it shared with
if you are interested.  I don't really understand how this works for non-gmail
addresses, but apparently it does somehow.  However, I've generally found it
easiest to have a gmail userid and have such documents shared with me at
that address.

Basically I list the email addresses of folks with access to the document
at docs.google.com and then you can login and get it.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

From warmerdam at pobox.com  Sun Feb 25 20:42:33 2007
From: warmerdam at pobox.com (Frank Warmerdam)
Date: Sun Feb 25 21:37:18 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Sponsorship Spreadsheet
Message-ID: <45E23B09.3030408@pobox.com>

Folks,

The FOSS4G conference committee quite successfully used a google spreadsheet
document as a way of collaborating on sponsorship prospects, and status. So
I have created a similar document for general OSGeo sponsorship, and I'd
be happy to share it with any members of the committee or folks interesting
in pursuing sponsors.  However, it at least mildly sensative so I'd prefer
it not be completely public.

Please email me the appropriate email address you would like it shared with
if you are interested.  I don't really understand how this works for non-gmail
addresses, but apparently it does somehow.  However, I've generally found it
easiest to have a gmail userid and have such documents shared with me at
that address.

Basically I list the email addresses of folks with access to the document
at docs.google.com and then you can login and get it.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

From tylermitchell at shaw.ca  Mon Feb 26 14:47:07 2007
From: tylermitchell at shaw.ca (Tyler Mitchell)
Date: Mon Feb 26 16:54:54 2007
Subject: [OSGeo-Fundraising] Sponsor logos on booths/exhibit material
Message-ID: <660556FF-BF80-48AA-AF65-150D45E2986C@shaw.ca>

Hi all,
Some event related material, mainly signs for a booth, are going to  
be created over the upcoming month or so and the question came up  
about which sponsor logos to put on them.  As Sustaining Sponsor,  
Autodesk is the only sponsor to have this explicit privilege.  After  
talking with their marketing group, we both though it can look bad to  
only have a single sponsor shown there.  That is, it can look like  
they are running the whole thing, which is not necessarily the  
message any of us want to portray.

So the question is whether we want to, even temporarily, include our  
associate sponsors in the signs on our booth - just to help diversify  
the feel of it or not.

To help justify it, we could consider using some of the donation from  
a particular sponsor toward the booth or event itself - using it like  
a attribution of their help for the event in particular.  That might  
be a stretch, but I was curious what you thought.

Tyler