16:43 <moray> gwolf: I understand they *want* that, I'm confused as to how they make the costs add up to be worse if we just said "shorter or nothing" though
16:43 <holger> moray, understandable he doesnt want that in the contract and we dont want to shorten neither. so i dont see much point in insisting on it. but when april/may comes and we still only have 100k (or less), we will need to shorten. but seriously, i cannot imagine them suing us, if we only take services worth 100k and paying those. we might agree that we'll have to pay a bit more then (so only get services worth 95k for 100k), but... thats ok if you ask me I really think this is a horrible gamble I've put a lot of work into investigating a contract that gives us the flexibility to only pay for the things we can afford, and it lets us make those decisions about numbers in April, we don't have to commit now and most likely lose later. Instead, despite another meeting where shortening was largely preferred, it is being suggested that DebConf13 commits to a contract that may be unsuitable while making plans to bully the vendor into changing the arrangements later. The fact that some people want two weeks doesn't make it affordable. If we call Le Camp in April and try to wriggle out of the 2 week contract, they could just seize the 60k of deposit money and insist that we pay more money for security or nobody will be permitted to arrive. If it's not affordable, don't sign, it's better for the good name of Debian to just go somewhere else, whether it is Interlaken, Fiesch, .de or .fr. (Also, Holger is not the one who will be sued because he is not a member of the dc13 association committee) _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list [email protected] http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
