Thanks for sharing the synopsis; I'm especially encouraged by (1) gender (identity) parity in the planning committee (2) strong presence of female-identifying folk at the conference and (3) continued financial support for attendees.
I'd be curious what the gender split was across attendees v. speakers -- possibly something worth tracking across years of conferences to get a sense of any shifts in attendee demographics. cheers - -k.bott On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mark Lucas <[email protected]> wrote: > I had the pleasure of serving as the OSGeo representative for the 2016 > FOSS4G NA conference selection and planning. I thought the team did an > excellent job in selecting, planning and running the conference. The team > made the decision to not pursue a 2017 NA conference so as not to compete > for resources with the OSGeo international conference. Our efforts will > focus on 2018 planning and selection for the next NA regional conference. > > On a personal note I was initially concerned about how the relationship > with Location Tech and OSGeo would evolve. Our teaming has resulted in yet > another successful conference that I believe plays to the strengths of both > organizations. I was very pleased with the openness and collaboration that > I witnessed. > — Mark > > > The synopsis from Andrea Ross is included below: > > FOSS4G NA 2016 Synopsis (please feel free to re-use this data) > > > - The conference ran from May 2-5, at the Raleigh Convention Center, > in Raleigh North Carolina. The code sprint & unconference ran May 6 & 7 at > Red Hat’s headquarters, a few blocks from the convention center. A Tour of > the NCSU OSGeo Research and Education lab took place on May 6th. > - The conference featured 1 day of workshops, 3 days of sessions, a > code sprint, an unconference, and social events every night. There were 93 > full length (35 minute) sessions, 36 short length (15 minute) sessions, 10 > workshops, and 3 keynotes. This represented an increase in full length. The > rooms were generally always near full or slightly overflowing for > particularly popular talks, despite them being big rooms. > - The conference grew by 33% . There were 558 attendees. This level of > increase is very positive, when so many other conferences are in decline. > - Like 2015’s team, 50% of the 2016 committee were women. Also like > 2015, a significant proportion of speakers and attendees were women (in the > 30% range), which is great to see. > - 23 people were at the conference who wouldn't have otherwise been > without the financial support we gave them. > - From the attendee survey, people were clearly thrilled about the > conference... 99% positive feedback. (n=102). The one negative response > said they were disappointed there was no lunch served. We’re not sure how > they missed it! The venue, the strong program, and the positive & > supportive atmosphere were the things people commented (positively) on > most. > - People loved the keynotes, and especially Tamar Cohen's entitled > Extreme Mapping. > - The video recordings of sessions are being uploaded to Youtube, with > dozens up, and more each day. > - 90% of sponsors rated the value excellent. 10% rated it very good. > The layout of the conference was especially appreciated as it meant plenty > of traffic for sponsors at all times. > > > This year’s conference was produced by Andrea Ross and the team at the > Eclipse Foundation, the same as 2015. Sarah Cordivano served as Community > Chair. Rob Emanuele was Program Committee Chair, repeating the same role he > performed in 2015. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
