OK, so I'm just going to throw this one out there to re-stoke the discussion ...
Venue selection process. At the moment, there's a few of us who work hard in the shadows to make the best choice we can from a range of generous offers :) In our brave new world, I think this should be a bit more open, what do you think? What kind of structure do we need to make the best decision? Regards, Tom On 01/07/15 15:29, Tom Fifield wrote: > Team, > > It's great to see so much passion! :) > > Here's an attempt at a summary email. I'll wait until a later email to > wade into the discussion myself ;) Feel free to jump in on any point. > > =Things we tend to agree on= > "Spirit of the event" > * The response most people had in common was that they didn't want to > see vendor booths :) Several others noted the importance that the event > should remain accessible and ensure there were no barriers to > attendance, space for networking with others and sharing information > about deployments without fear of vendor harassment. > > Multiple Sponsors > * are OK, but they are more like underwriters who should be OK with only > modest acknowledgement (see previous: no booths). Preference for > operator sponsors. Several ways to recognise them possible. > > Current Schedule Format > * It appeared like the current format is working well in general, but > could do with minor tweaks. > > > =Things still under discussion= > Sell Tickets > * Many people agreed that some moderate form of ticketing could be OK, > but the question remains to what extent this should be priced ("low > fee"? $100-200? "cover costs"?). A strong counterpoint was that paid > ticketing makes it less accessible (see "spirit"), prevents some local > attendance, and is unfair to smaller operators, though others noted that > it may be the only practical way to raise funds in the future. > > Break into Regional Events > * A number of viewpoints, ranging from "multiple regional events" to > "one event only [maybe with a travel fund]" to "one event that moves > around [maybe even outside USA]" to "make it in the centre of USA for > easier travel on average". > > > Capping Numbers (inc. Limit Attendees per Company) > * A lot of disagreement here. Many argued that any kind of cap or > barrier to entry detracts from the accessibility of the event. Others > put forth that too few restrictions could dilute the ops-heavy attendee > base, and implied that large companies might send too many people. > > > Multiple Tracks > * To help deal with room size, we could split into multiple tracks. The > ideal number of tracks is not clear at this stage. > > Evening Event > * Several people said they found the PHL evening event uncomfortably > packed, and suggested cancelling it on this basis, or on the basis of > cost. Suggested alternate was posting a list of nearby venues. > > Lightening Talks > * Have lightening talks, perhaps by renaming "show and tell". More of > them? Arranged differently? Unclear. > > =Ideas= > * Video Recording - Might be worth a shot, starting small. > * Travel Fund, Scholarship Fund, Slush Fund > * Use Universities during the summer break for venues > > =Open Questions= > * How will the number of attendees grow? > * What are the costs involved in hosting one of these events? > * Stuff about the summit - probably need a different thread for this > > > Regards, > > > Tom > > > > > On 30/06/15 12:33, Tom Fifield wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Right now, behind-the-scenes, we're working on getting a venue for next >> ops mid-cycle. It's taking a little longer than normal, but rest assured >> it is happening. >> >> Why is it so difficult? As you may have noticed, we're reaching the size >> of event where both physically and financially, only the largest >> organisations can host us. >> >> We thought we might get away with organising this one old-school with a >> single host and sponsor. Then, for the next, start a brainstorming >> discussion with you about how we scale these events into the future - >> since once we get up and beyond a few hundred people, we're looking at >> having to hire a venue as well as make some changes to the format of the >> event. >> >> However, it seems that even this might be too late. We already had a >> company that proposed to host the meetup at a west coast US hotel >> instead of their place, and wanted to scope out other companies to >> sponsor food. >> >> This would be a change in the model, so let's commence the discussion of >> how we want to scale this event :) >> >> So far I've heard things like: >> * "my $CORPORATE_BENEFACTOR would be fine to share sponsorship with others" >> * "I really don't want to get to the point where we want booths at the >> ops meetup" >> >> Which are promising! It seems like we have a shared understanding of >> what to take this forward with. >> >> So, as the ops meetup grows - what would it look like for you? >> >> How do you think we can manage the venue selection and financial side of >> things? What about the session layout and the scheduling with the >> growing numbers of attendees? >> >> Current data can be found at >> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Operations/Meetups#Venue_Selection . >> >> I would also be interested in your thoughts about how these events have >> only been in a limited geographical area so far, and how we can address >> that issue. >> >> >> Regards, >> >> >> Tom >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-operators mailing list >> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >> > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-operators mailing list > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators