The more I hear, the more upset I am getting (for a person who has tremendously thick skin, this is not a good sign) -- How is it that the exec can learn from the mistakes from LinuxFest 2006 when the key people (at least from my point of view) have not been consulted? Who if anyone from the last LinuxFest has provided input except for Mark's post mortem review?
Everything that you have said has merit, however this communication is very late in coming and your stated action plan lacks integrity of representation. How can you say that you represent the interest of the group when the group does not have input? By your action, it would seem to me that the executive intents to run LinuxFest 2007 from planning to implementation - are you planning to be project managers as well for the event? I am trying very hard not to air dirty laundry in public but from the point of almost unanimous proclamation by the group that we should do LinuxFest 2006 until February of this year, we had two factions, one that wanted to implement LinuxFest 2006 and one that wanted to shelf the idea for another year. At that meeting, we lost quite a few supporters that were coming out to help plan the event - we spent almost 3 hours debating the merits of holding the event versus shelving it. I can not believe we had active opposition in the executive ranks to the implementation of LinuxFest 2006 up to the week before the event. We were told that we did not have the resources to implement and here we have the same knowledgeable bias programming the next event in seclusion. This is truly bogus and this last communication has indicated to me that either I am truly missing the point in which case I apologize profusely or the misrepresentation of the general Clug population has just gone wild - could I be wrong on both counts? Someone tell me that I am wrong and that I did not waste my time, energy and money on LinuxFest 2006. So far only Bhardwaj, Grover and myself have let the feelings known -- I guess if it really isn't a concern with the rest of Clug, I'll take my marbles and play elsewhere. From the height of the announcement of LinuxFest NorthWest 07 to scrapping of the bottom of the barrel -- what an unbelievable dismal journey. I guess I know who I can thank. bogi wrote: >Shawn, i will accept your bet, also i can tell you at this moment, that you >have lost the money :-), all we are discussing is what are our possibilities, >and what worked and what did not work, so when the discussion opens in the >group level, totally open, and the suggestions come in droves, at least some >of us would have a half decent idea of what worked, and could / should be >done again, and what ideas did not pan out, and maybe a new approach would be >more appropriate ... summoning these items would take months from any >committee or Sig or any other group that would handle the events work and >ease it significantly, after tomorrow, we would have another meeting to put >some more dots over the appropriate letters, and by any measurement, starting >a week later would not be a major problem, specially if the work process >would be a lot more streamlined. There are some of the key questions: >Are we going to enlist corporate support ? Banner space and booth for a >reasonable contribution ... ? >Yes, and would that be an issue for U of C, and exactly how much would it be >an issue ? >What can be reasonably expected from a contribution ? >If we can offer more perks for the speakers, could we get more speakers? or >are we too insignificant for anyone to come to talk at our event, ok, so >likely if we would offer some extra perks, we would be able to get more >famous speakers. And i think we are significant enough that we would get a >few antways, even without any extra perks. >Of the multitude of presentations which where the most successful in >attracting the audience, and would it be a good idea to have more of those? >Of the multitude of other activities, which where effective, useful to the >audience, and which where not and why? > >here are just a few questions off the top of my head, that we can and should >come up with reasonable answers to kick the ball of with, instead of a lets >go do something approach. Needless to say, the event last year was a success, >i guess anyone can arrive to that conclusion, that however makes the planing >and execution of the next event even more delicate a process, we have to >build on our successes and improve on our failures and not repeat them. Once >we get all the the feedback we can identify them failures and then >concentrate on improvements and fixes for them, also we can identify the >success elements and properly repeat them. The new ideas and their >implementation is something i can not forsee , but i am sure we will have >many. > >Cheers >Szemir > > _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [email protected] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
