subject:"\[CODE4LIB\] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update."

In my experience accross countless conferences, not remembering the
food is usually a good thing.

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote:
 Although I sat in the room and nodded a lot in Athens when we picked
 and chose our conference options and signed the contract, I remember
 very few details of it anymore.

 I do remember when the UGA Conference Center representative left the
 room for a minute that we all thought that the prices we were looking
 at must be the daily rate, since we couldn't imagine the total costs
 being that cheap (in fact, it *was* the total cost).

 UGA could actually have handled a conference much more the size of a
 modern C4L (the plenary session room seats ~350).

 What the Georgia Center doesn't have is polish ('zazz!) and Athens
 definitely fits Kyle's and Joe's profile of being less accessible
 (although that also applies to Bloomington, Asheville and Corvallis).
 While I certainly appreciated the venues in Portland, Providence and
 Asheville, I wouldn't say that they had a tremendous impact on the
 outcome of the conference (I don't, for example, remember the food at
 any and *none* of the plenary rooms were as good as Athens).  I do
 remember the bars at Providence and Portland, though.

 I'm not arguing for us returning to Athens, but don't think it's
 completely unique (see: Corvallis).  If this desire to offset
 conference costs is really deep (and I think that reducing the
 dependency on sponsorship *should* be a goal, honestly -- it's a lot
 of work and very unpredictable), then I think there are definitely
 opportunities.  It's just a matter of scouting locations and figuring
 out how to get the local population to get involved.  I think this
 would be easier if there was some kind of insurance policy in place so
 that the host isn't completely on the hook for all of the costs if
 things go pear shaped.

 -Ross.

 On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Kyle Banerjee baner...@uoregon.edu wrote:
 The third code4lib conference was hosted in Portland, and the venue was a
 hotel. Costs were **much** higher in Portland, due mainly to the type of
 venue (hotel) and Portland being a larger city. To keep the registration
 fee at $125 (which I think it was, if memory serves me correctly), we
 needed to get $40k worth of sponsorships, which was about 4x the amount of
 either the previous two years. It was hectic and a bit nerve-wracking, but
 we hustled and worked hard and brought in the necessary sponsorships
 without the need to provide any special events - all of the sponsors we
 willing to sponsor us based on the general sponsorship levels that we've
 put out each year.


 This is exactly what is going on in Seattle.

 If we can attract $40K in sponsorships, the registration fee will be kept
 low. But that gives people an idea of what is being dealt with in the
 background as that works out to nearly $200 per attendee. Not trivial to do
 in today's climate, but you can be sure everyone will try their best.

 kyle





-- 
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

I honestly don't think it's a disaster if registration fee approaches 
$200 either. (I realize you said $200 in _addition_ to the usual $125, 
I'm saying $200, heh).


I think $200 is about the max that seems okay to me, but $200 does. 
That's still a good price for the conf, and still fairly affordable, and 
with inflation from the original $125 like five years ago not totally 
out of line even.


$300 would be really unfortunate though. But $180? We'll live.

On 6/14/2011 7:42 PM, Kyle Banerjee wrote:

The third code4lib conference was hosted in Portland, and the venue was a
hotel. Costs were **much** higher in Portland, due mainly to the type of
venue (hotel) and Portland being a larger city. To keep the registration
fee at $125 (which I think it was, if memory serves me correctly), we
needed to get $40k worth of sponsorships, which was about 4x the amount of
either the previous two years. It was hectic and a bit nerve-wracking, but
we hustled and worked hard and brought in the necessary sponsorships
without the need to provide any special events - all of the sponsors we
willing to sponsor us based on the general sponsorship levels that we've
put out each year.


This is exactly what is going on in Seattle.

If we can attract $40K in sponsorships, the registration fee will be kept
low. But that gives people an idea of what is being dealt with in the
background as that works out to nearly $200 per attendee. Not trivial to do
in today's climate, but you can be sure everyone will try their best.

kyle

[CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

2011-06-15 Thread Susan Kane

Hi Anj,

Nice to see your name again after meeting briefly at UW when you were coming
and I was leaving for Boston!

I doubt I'll be able to attend the conference this year but I've put the
word out to the group of Ex Libris and Endeavor alumni that I manage on
LinkedIn.  Many people now work for other library technology companies.
Will let you know if anything useful comes back.

Here's a copy of my promotional message, in case others on the list want to
try their own networks.  It might help our cause if someone could add a link
about sponsorships to the conference section of the website.

--- promotional blurb ---

c4l -- code4lib is a unique conference that attracts a small but influential
group of library technologists each year. Next year's conference is Feb 6-9,
2012 in Seattle, WA. They are still seeking vendor sponsorships -- great
visibility with influential folks for a fraction of the cost of ALA!   If
you can help, please contact me privately through your preferred contact
method here.

http://code4lib.org/conferencehttp://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2Fconferenceurlhash=-Iyx_t=tracking_anet

-- promotional blurb ---

Susan Kane
Harvard University OIS

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

So maybe part of the problem is our venue voting system -- people vote 
for flashy locations, which are also expensive locations. The people 
voting (which is anyone who wants to) don't neccesarily consider all the 
ramifications (don't neccesarily have the experience/background to do so 
even if they thought of it).


Heresy I know, but I wonder if we should change conf host/site selection 
from an open vote, to a conf selection committee that chooses.  Then the 
committee could say to themselves you know, even though the hosts say 
no problem keeping costs as usual, we don't think an expensive city like 
that is the best thing for us. Of course, in addition to being 
heretical, that would rely on there being some people who wanted to fill 
that role, which there may not be.


On 6/15/2011 10:06 AM, Ross Singer wrote:

Although I sat in the room and nodded a lot in Athens when we picked
and chose our conference options and signed the contract, I remember
very few details of it anymore.

I do remember when the UGA Conference Center representative left the
room for a minute that we all thought that the prices we were looking
at must be the daily rate, since we couldn't imagine the total costs
being that cheap (in fact, it *was* the total cost).

UGA could actually have handled a conference much more the size of a
modern C4L (the plenary session room seats ~350).

What the Georgia Center doesn't have is polish ('zazz!) and Athens
definitely fits Kyle's and Joe's profile of being less accessible
(although that also applies to Bloomington, Asheville and Corvallis).
While I certainly appreciated the venues in Portland, Providence and
Asheville, I wouldn't say that they had a tremendous impact on the
outcome of the conference (I don't, for example, remember the food at
any and *none* of the plenary rooms were as good as Athens).  I do
remember the bars at Providence and Portland, though.

I'm not arguing for us returning to Athens, but don't think it's
completely unique (see: Corvallis).  If this desire to offset
conference costs is really deep (and I think that reducing the
dependency on sponsorship *should* be a goal, honestly -- it's a lot
of work and very unpredictable), then I think there are definitely
opportunities.  It's just a matter of scouting locations and figuring
out how to get the local population to get involved.  I think this
would be easier if there was some kind of insurance policy in place so
that the host isn't completely on the hook for all of the costs if
things go pear shaped.

-Ross.

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Kyle Banerjeebaner...@uoregon.edu  wrote:

The third code4lib conference was hosted in Portland, and the venue was a
hotel. Costs were **much** higher in Portland, due mainly to the type of
venue (hotel) and Portland being a larger city. To keep the registration
fee at $125 (which I think it was, if memory serves me correctly), we
needed to get $40k worth of sponsorships, which was about 4x the amount of
either the previous two years. It was hectic and a bit nerve-wracking, but
we hustled and worked hard and brought in the necessary sponsorships
without the need to provide any special events - all of the sponsors we
willing to sponsor us based on the general sponsorship levels that we've
put out each year.


This is exactly what is going on in Seattle.

If we can attract $40K in sponsorships, the registration fee will be kept
low. But that gives people an idea of what is being dealt with in the
background as that works out to nearly $200 per attendee. Not trivial to do
in today's climate, but you can be sure everyone will try their best.

kyle

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update


On 6/15/2011 12:51 PM, Susan Kane wrote:

great
visibility with influential folks for a fraction of the cost of ALA!



That's an interesting point too -- you pay for a booth at ALA ($), 
you DO reach a whole lot of people, but it's a lot more expensive than 
even our 'platinum' sponsorship, no? And we're talking about giving 
people really even more exposure potentially (a presentation to a 
captive audience at a banquet?) then you get from a booth at ALA (albeit 
many fewer people).


Depending on the site, if there's room in the registration area for a 
couple other tables, we could also offer sponsors a conference-long 
table to sit at and hand out stuff, if they wanted it. I don't know if 
they'd want it or not. But that would be a benefit unlikely to upset 
anyone. probably.

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-15 Thread Kevin S. Clarke

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote:

 Heresy I know, but I wonder if we should change conf host/site selection
 from an open vote, to a conf selection committee that chooses.  Then the
 committee could say to themselves you know, even though the hosts say no
 problem keeping costs as usual, we don't think an expensive city like that
 is the best thing for us. Of course, in addition to being heretical, that
 would rely on there being some people who wanted to fill that role, which
 there may not be.

What is the problem we're trying to solve again?  Do we think that the
recent conferences have cost too much for the attendees?  That this
year's will cost too much?  Are we worried about not finding places to
host in the future?  Are we worried about needing the level of
sponsorship that we currently do?

This seems, to me, like a solution in search of a problem.  If we've
trying to address the conference's relationship with its sponsors,
Jaf's suggestion (e.g., define our expectations and see what happens)
seems like a reasonable first step to me.

Kevin

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-15 Thread Sean Hannan

Honestly, I'm the most concerned that there was only one proposal last year.
Let's try to solve that problem.

-Sean


On 6/15/11 1:46 PM, Kevin S. Clarke kscla...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote:
 
 Heresy I know, but I wonder if we should change conf host/site selection
 from an open vote, to a conf selection committee that chooses.  Then the
 committee could say to themselves you know, even though the hosts say no
 problem keeping costs as usual, we don't think an expensive city like that
 is the best thing for us. Of course, in addition to being heretical, that
 would rely on there being some people who wanted to fill that role, which
 there may not be.
 
 What is the problem we're trying to solve again?  Do we think that the
 recent conferences have cost too much for the attendees?  That this
 year's will cost too much?  Are we worried about not finding places to
 host in the future?  Are we worried about needing the level of
 sponsorship that we currently do?
 
 This seems, to me, like a solution in search of a problem.  If we've
 trying to address the conference's relationship with its sponsors,
 Jaf's suggestion (e.g., define our expectations and see what happens)
 seems like a reasonable first step to me.
 
 Kevin

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.


On 6/15/2011 1:46 PM, Kevin S. Clarke wrote:


What is the problem we're trying to solve again?  Do we think that the
recent conferences have cost too much for the attendees?  That this
year's will cost too much?  Are we worried about not finding places to
host in the future?  Are we worried about needing the level of
sponsorship that we currently do?


I guess I'm worried that conferences have become more expensive and more 
work to put on. This means:


a) It's harder to find people to host, and harder for them to do it in a 
way that makes the community happy, and that doesn't destroy themselves.


b) They need to find a lot more sponsorship, which is risky, and 
potentially means giving sponsors privileges that change the nature or 
feel of the conf.


This thread began with a suggestion from current conf hosts that they 
need to find more things to give sponsors. Which reminded me of last 
year's sponsored banquet, which ended up not having a presentation from 
the vendor, but which was supposed to, which I would not have liked, 
having a sponsor deliver a presentation to a captive conf audience in 
return for sponsorship.

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-15 Thread Ross Singer

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Sean Hannan shan...@jhu.edu wrote:
 Honestly, I'm the most concerned that there was only one proposal last year.
 Let's try to solve that problem.

+1

-Ross.

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

2011-06-15 Thread Anjanette Young

Hey Susan,

Sweet! Language. Information. Social niceties.

Here is the link to the 2012 sponsor page.

http://code4lib.org/node/417

(Anyone know how to make that a nicer url on drupal?)

There seems to be discussion on expanding options for sponsorship, but the
options on the page are standard.
Thank you for the words. Hope that it turns out that you able to travel to
Seattle for the conference.

--Anj

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Susan Kane adarconsult...@gmail.comwrote:

Hi Anj,

Nice to see your name again after meeting briefly at UW when you were
coming
and I was leaving for Boston!

I doubt I'll be able to attend the conference this year but I've put the
word out to the group of Ex Libris and Endeavor alumni that I manage on
LinkedIn. Many people now work for other library technology companies.
Will let you know if anything useful comes back.

Here's a copy of my promotional message, in case others on the list want to
try their own networks. It might help our cause if someone could add a
link
about sponsorships to the conference section of the website.

--- promotional blurb ---

c4l -- code4lib is a unique conference that attracts a small but
influential
group of library technologists each year. Next year's conference is Feb
6-9,
2012 in Seattle, WA. They are still seeking vendor sponsorships -- great
visibility with influential folks for a fraction of the cost of ALA! If
you can help, please contact me privately through your preferred contact
method here.

http://code4lib.org/conference
http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2Fconferenceurlhash=-Iyx_t=tracking_anet

-- promotional blurb ---

Susan Kane
Harvard University OIS

--
Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
Phone: 206.616.2867

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-15 Thread Ross Singer

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Kevin S. Clarke kscla...@gmail.com wrote:
 What is the problem we're trying to solve again?  Do we think that the
 recent conferences have cost too much for the attendees?  That this
 year's will cost too much?  Are we worried about not finding places to
 host in the future?  Are we worried about needing the level of
 sponsorship that we currently do?

I don't think the issue is the registration cost, but the total cost
of the conference itself, which, minus sponsorship affects
registration cost at some level.

While any conference is going to need to be subsidized by the
sponsorships to keep registration costs down to our (low!)
satisfactory levels, it makes some sense to mitigate risk by having
the conference in cheaper venues.  Sponsorship, after all, is not a
guarantee.

-Ross.

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-15 Thread todd.d.robb...@gmail.com

Just a heads up: I and about 5 other MLIS/MSIM students at the UW iSchool
are very interested in helping. Looking forward to the event!

Tod Robbins
MLIS '12
Information School
University of Washington

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

More tales from DrupalCon-land...

Before we professionalized our events, we had a competitive system
like C4L. That was fine as long as we had one solid proposal. In 2008,
the only proposal for out European event was from Szeged, Hungary,
near the borders with Romania and Serbia, and a long way from anywhere
mot westerners would like to fly in to. We drew 500 folks and broke
even. 125 of them were from North America, so it really wasn't
successful in terms of building our European community. Interestingly,
hardly any of the Hungarian developers showed up. They had a bigger
turnout in Barcelona, a year earlier.

I don't think that C4L should professionalize its conference. Our
needs and scale don't support that. I do think that It wouldn't be a
bad idea to start planning two years out front.

The primary attendee concern and single biggest budget item for
DrupalCon is IP. We now hire Marriette Associates, the folks who do IP
for Apple's WWDC, to manage our conference IP. We were fortunate in
getting to do one event in a place with an open pipe, which gave us
some great metrics and reduced the amount of guesswork going forward.
This spring, we had our conference in a Chicago hotel that had great,
'90s era service, so we put a point-to-point tower on the roof and did
it ourselves.

For the upcoming C4L, we looked at three venues and were very
fortunate to find one that had sufficient bandwidth, decent
infrastructure, and perhaps most importantly, a qualified tech. The
other two were black holes.

Since it is doubtful that, unless we want to sell a lot more
sponsorships, we will be able to afford to run our own networks
(although this is more doable in a single room event than on four
floors of a hotel), moving the timeline out an extra year could be
very helpful.

Thanks,

Cary

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Sean Hannan shan...@jhu.edu wrote:
 Honestly, I'm the most concerned that there was only one proposal last year.
 Let's try to solve that problem.

 -Sean


 On 6/15/11 1:46 PM, Kevin S. Clarke kscla...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote:

 Heresy I know, but I wonder if we should change conf host/site selection
 from an open vote, to a conf selection committee that chooses.  Then the
 committee could say to themselves you know, even though the hosts say no
 problem keeping costs as usual, we don't think an expensive city like that
 is the best thing for us. Of course, in addition to being heretical, that
 would rely on there being some people who wanted to fill that role, which
 there may not be.

 What is the problem we're trying to solve again?  Do we think that the
 recent conferences have cost too much for the attendees?  That this
 year's will cost too much?  Are we worried about not finding places to
 host in the future?  Are we worried about needing the level of
 sponsorship that we currently do?

 This seems, to me, like a solution in search of a problem.  If we've
 trying to address the conference's relationship with its sponsors,
 Jaf's suggestion (e.g., define our expectations and see what happens)
 seems like a reasonable first step to me.

 Kevin




-- 
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

2011-06-15 Thread Kyle Banerjee

One form of recognition that I think is almost a no brainer is a Sponsor
page containing appropriately sized logos in sponsorship level order that
has the sole purpose of recognizing the sponsors. A link to the sponsor page
would be provided at the top of the conference page. This would be
unobtrusive yet informative.

I've missed the last few meetings, but a sponsor page in the packets when
people arrive along the web page idea also seems like a decent idea as it
helps make sponsors visible without being in the way. Only the Platinum
would get to include a handout as well.

Anything involving captive audiences sounds as unattractive as a timeshare
presentation. Aside from being annoying, such situations disrupt exactly the
sort of interaction we hope to achieve by meeting in person.

As far as tables go, I am agnostic if space allows. But I suspect it would
be better for the conference and vendors alike if they just participate and
mix it up with other attendees rather sitting around somewhere handing out
slick brochures.

kyle


On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.eduwrote:

 On 6/15/2011 12:51 PM, Susan Kane wrote:

 great
 visibility with influential folks for a fraction of the cost of ALA!



 That's an interesting point too -- you pay for a booth at ALA ($), you
 DO reach a whole lot of people, but it's a lot more expensive than even our
 'platinum' sponsorship, no? And we're talking about giving people really
 even more exposure potentially (a presentation to a captive audience at a
 banquet?) then you get from a booth at ALA (albeit many fewer people).

 Depending on the site, if there's room in the registration area for a
 couple other tables, we could also offer sponsors a conference-long table to
 sit at and hand out stuff, if they wanted it. I don't know if they'd want it
 or not. But that would be a benefit unlikely to upset anyone. probably.




-- 
--
Kyle Banerjee
Digital Services Program Manager
Orbis Cascade Alliance
baner...@uoregon.edu / 503.877.9773

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

In a modern version of Drupal, you can set a path alias for any page.
Unfortunately, C4L does not appear to be in a modern version of
Drupal. It looks like 4.7 or earlier.

I would be happy to volunteer to help manage it.

Cary

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Anjanette Young
youn...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Hey Susan,

Sweet! Language. Information. Social niceties.

Here is the link to the 2012 sponsor page.

http://code4lib.org/node/417

(Anyone know how to make that a nicer url on drupal?)

--Anj

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Susan Kane adarconsult...@gmail.comwrote:

Hi Anj,

Nice to see your name again after meeting briefly at UW when you were
coming
and I was leaving for Boston!

--- promotional blurb ---

http://code4lib.org/conference
http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2Fconferenceurlhash=-Iyx_t=tracking_anet

-- promotional blurb ---

Susan Kane
Harvard University OIS

--
Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
Phone: 206.616.2867

--
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

2011-06-15 Thread Rob Casson

i've got admin rights on the code4lib drupal, so i went ahead and set the alias:

http://code4lib.org/code4lib_2012_sponsorship

cary: i'll look into getting you the correct privileges. you're
highermath, correct?

cheers,
rob

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Cary Gordon listu...@chillco.com wrote:
In a modern version of Drupal, you can set a path alias for any page.
Unfortunately, C4L does not appear to be in a modern version of
Drupal. It looks like 4.7 or earlier.

I would be happy to volunteer to help manage it.

Cary

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Anjanette Young
youn...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Hey Susan,

Sweet! Language. Information. Social niceties.

Here is the link to the 2012 sponsor page.

http://code4lib.org/node/417

(Anyone know how to make that a nicer url on drupal?)

--Anj

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Susan Kane adarconsult...@gmail.comwrote:

Hi Anj,

Nice to see your name again after meeting briefly at UW when you were
coming
and I was leaving for Boston!

--- promotional blurb ---

http://code4lib.org/conference
http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2Fconferenceurlhash=-Iyx_t=tracking_anet

-- promotional blurb ---

Susan Kane
Harvard University OIS

--
Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
Phone: 206.616.2867

--
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

That's me!

It is probably a good time to move this to a newer version, perhaps
Drupal 7, if for no other reason than security. The only downside is
that the theme would either need to be recreated or change. No biggy,
really.

If someone wants to send me the code and a DB dump, I will do it in my
less-than-ample spare time.

Cary

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Rob Casson rob.cas...@gmail.com wrote:
i've got admin rights on the code4lib drupal, so i went ahead and set the
alias:

http://code4lib.org/code4lib_2012_sponsorship

cary: i'll look into getting you the correct privileges. you're
highermath, correct?

cheers,
rob

I would be happy to volunteer to help manage it.

Cary

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Anjanette Young
youn...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Hey Susan,

Sweet! Language. Information. Social niceties.

Here is the link to the 2012 sponsor page.

http://code4lib.org/node/417

(Anyone know how to make that a nicer url on drupal?)

--Anj

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Susan Kane adarconsult...@gmail.comwrote:

Hi Anj,

Nice to see your name again after meeting briefly at UW when you were
coming
and I was leaving for Boston!

--- promotional blurb ---

http://code4lib.org/conference
http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2Fconferenceurlhash=-Iyx_t=tracking_anet

-- promotional blurb ---

Susan Kane
Harvard University OIS

--
Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
Phone: 206.616.2867

--
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

2011-06-15 Thread Wick, Ryan

Thanks for offering to help. I agree about the need to upgrade, and this is a 
pretty quiet time to do so.

I'm guessing the theme will need to be done from scratch. It was already 
cobbled together.

I'll try and send you some more information later today. If anyone else really 
wants in on this, let me know.

Ryan Wick

-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Cary 
Gordon
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 12:31 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

That's me!

It is probably a good time to move this to a newer version, perhaps Drupal 7, 
if for no other reason than security. The only downside is that the theme would 
either need to be recreated or change. No biggy, really.

If someone wants to send me the code and a DB dump, I will do it in my 
less-than-ample spare time.

Cary

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Rob Casson rob.cas...@gmail.com wrote:
 i've got admin rights on the code4lib drupal, so i went ahead and set the 
 alias:

     http://code4lib.org/code4lib_2012_sponsorship

 cary: i'll look into getting you the correct privileges.  you're 
 highermath, correct?

 cheers,
 rob

 On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Cary Gordon listu...@chillco.com wrote:
 In a modern version of Drupal, you can set a path alias for any page.
 Unfortunately, C4L does not appear to be in a modern version of 
 Drupal. It looks like 4.7 or earlier.

 I would be happy to volunteer to help manage it.

 Cary

 On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Anjanette Young 
 youn...@u.washington.edu wrote:
 Hey Susan,

 Sweet! Language. Information. Social niceties.

 Here is the link to the 2012 sponsor page.

 http://code4lib.org/node/417

 (Anyone know how to make that a nicer url on drupal?)

 There seems to be discussion on expanding options for sponsorship, 
 but the options on the page are standard.
 Thank you for the words.  Hope that it turns out that you able to 
 travel to Seattle for the conference.

 --Anj

 On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Susan Kane adarconsult...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hi Anj,

 Nice to see your name again after meeting briefly at UW when you 
 were coming and I was leaving for Boston!

 I doubt I'll be able to attend the conference this year but I've 
 put the word out to the group of Ex Libris and Endeavor alumni that 
 I manage on LinkedIn.  Many people now work for other library technology 
 companies.
 Will let you know if anything useful comes back.

 Here's a copy of my promotional message, in case others on the list 
 want to try their own networks.  It might help our cause if someone 
 could add a link about sponsorships to the conference section of 
 the website.

 --- promotional blurb ---

 c4l -- code4lib is a unique conference that attracts a small but 
 influential group of library technologists each year. Next year's 
 conference is Feb 6-9,
 2012 in Seattle, WA. They are still seeking vendor sponsorships -- 
 great visibility with influential folks for a fraction of the cost 
 of ALA!   If you can help, please contact me privately through 
 your preferred contact method here.

 http://code4lib.org/conference
 http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2F
 conferenceurlhash=-Iyx_t=tracking_anet
 

 -- promotional blurb ---

 Susan Kane
 Harvard University OIS




 --
 Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
 University of Washington Libraries
 Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
 Phone: 206.616.2867




 --
 Cary Gordon
 The Cherry Hill Company
 http://chillco.com





--
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

The theme looks like a minor hack of the Chameleon theme, so it should
not be difficult to reproduce.

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Wick, Ryan ryan.w...@oregonstate.edu wrote:
 Thanks for offering to help. I agree about the need to upgrade, and this is a 
 pretty quiet time to do so.

 I'm guessing the theme will need to be done from scratch. It was already 
 cobbled together.

 I'll try and send you some more information later today. If anyone else 
 really wants in on this, let me know.

 Ryan Wick

 -Original Message-
 From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Cary 
 Gordon
 Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 12:31 PM
 To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
 Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

 That's me!

 It is probably a good time to move this to a newer version, perhaps Drupal 7, 
 if for no other reason than security. The only downside is that the theme 
 would either need to be recreated or change. No biggy, really.

 If someone wants to send me the code and a DB dump, I will do it in my 
 less-than-ample spare time.

 Cary

 On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Rob Casson rob.cas...@gmail.com wrote:
 i've got admin rights on the code4lib drupal, so i went ahead and set the 
 alias:

     http://code4lib.org/code4lib_2012_sponsorship

 cary: i'll look into getting you the correct privileges.  you're
 highermath, correct?

 cheers,
 rob

 On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Cary Gordon listu...@chillco.com wrote:
 In a modern version of Drupal, you can set a path alias for any page.
 Unfortunately, C4L does not appear to be in a modern version of
 Drupal. It looks like 4.7 or earlier.

 I would be happy to volunteer to help manage it.

 Cary

 On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Anjanette Young
 youn...@u.washington.edu wrote:
 Hey Susan,

 Sweet! Language. Information. Social niceties.

 Here is the link to the 2012 sponsor page.

 http://code4lib.org/node/417

 (Anyone know how to make that a nicer url on drupal?)

 There seems to be discussion on expanding options for sponsorship,
 but the options on the page are standard.
 Thank you for the words.  Hope that it turns out that you able to
 travel to Seattle for the conference.

 --Anj

 On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Susan Kane 
 adarconsult...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hi Anj,

 Nice to see your name again after meeting briefly at UW when you
 were coming and I was leaving for Boston!

 I doubt I'll be able to attend the conference this year but I've
 put the word out to the group of Ex Libris and Endeavor alumni that
 I manage on LinkedIn.  Many people now work for other library technology 
 companies.
 Will let you know if anything useful comes back.

 Here's a copy of my promotional message, in case others on the list
 want to try their own networks.  It might help our cause if someone
 could add a link about sponsorships to the conference section of
 the website.

 --- promotional blurb ---

 c4l -- code4lib is a unique conference that attracts a small but
 influential group of library technologists each year. Next year's
 conference is Feb 6-9,
 2012 in Seattle, WA. They are still seeking vendor sponsorships --
 great visibility with influential folks for a fraction of the cost
 of ALA!   If you can help, please contact me privately through
 your preferred contact method here.

 http://code4lib.org/conference
 http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2F
 conferenceurlhash=-Iyx_t=tracking_anet
 

 -- promotional blurb ---

 Susan Kane
 Harvard University OIS




 --
 Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
 University of Washington Libraries
 Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
 Phone: 206.616.2867




 --
 Cary Gordon
 The Cherry Hill Company
 http://chillco.com





 --
 Cary Gordon
 The Cherry Hill Company
 http://chillco.com




-- 
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

I doubt anyone is particularly wedded to the particularities of the 
current theme. It probably doesn't matter, as long as you can put the 
code4lib logo at the top with a banner-menu, if the theme changes, even 
significantly. As long as it has pretty much the same functionality 
exposed that it has now (and even that probably isn't that carefully 
thought out).


On 6/15/2011 4:23 PM, Cary Gordon wrote:

The theme looks like a minor hack of the Chameleon theme, so it should
not be difficult to reproduce.

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Wick, Ryanryan.w...@oregonstate.edu  wrote:

Thanks for offering to help. I agree about the need to upgrade, and this is a 
pretty quiet time to do so.

I'm guessing the theme will need to be done from scratch. It was already 
cobbled together.

I'll try and send you some more information later today. If anyone else really 
wants in on this, let me know.

Ryan Wick

-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Cary 
Gordon
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 12:31 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update

That's me!

It is probably a good time to move this to a newer version, perhaps Drupal 7, 
if for no other reason than security. The only downside is that the theme would 
either need to be recreated or change. No biggy, really.

If someone wants to send me the code and a DB dump, I will do it in my 
less-than-ample spare time.

Cary

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Rob Cassonrob.cas...@gmail.com  wrote:

i've got admin rights on the code4lib drupal, so i went ahead and set the alias:

 http://code4lib.org/code4lib_2012_sponsorship

cary: i'll look into getting you the correct privileges.  you're
highermath, correct?

cheers,
rob

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Cary Gordonlistu...@chillco.com  wrote:

In a modern version of Drupal, you can set a path alias for any page.
Unfortunately, C4L does not appear to be in a modern version of
Drupal. It looks like 4.7 or earlier.

I would be happy to volunteer to help manage it.

Cary

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Anjanette Young
youn...@u.washington.edu  wrote:

Hey Susan,

Sweet! Language. Information. Social niceties.

Here is the link to the 2012 sponsor page.

http://code4lib.org/node/417

(Anyone know how to make that a nicer url on drupal?)

There seems to be discussion on expanding options for sponsorship,
but the options on the page are standard.
Thank you for the words.  Hope that it turns out that you able to
travel to Seattle for the conference.

--Anj

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Susan Kaneadarconsult...@gmail.comwrote:


Hi Anj,

Nice to see your name again after meeting briefly at UW when you
were coming and I was leaving for Boston!

I doubt I'll be able to attend the conference this year but I've
put the word out to the group of Ex Libris and Endeavor alumni that
I manage on LinkedIn.  Many people now work for other library technology 
companies.
Will let you know if anything useful comes back.

Here's a copy of my promotional message, in case others on the list
want to try their own networks.  It might help our cause if someone
could add a link about sponsorships to the conference section of
the website.

--- promotional blurb ---

c4l -- code4lib is a unique conference that attracts a small but
influential group of library technologists each year. Next year's
conference is Feb 6-9,
2012 in Seattle, WA. They are still seeking vendor sponsorships --
great visibility with influential folks for a fraction of the cost
of ALA!   If you can help, please contact me privately through
your preferred contact method here.

http://code4lib.org/conference
http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2F
conferenceurlhash=-Iyx_t=tracking_anet
-- promotional blurb ---

Susan Kane
Harvard University OIS




--
Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
Phone: 206.616.2867




--
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com




--
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-14 Thread Anjanette Young

Excellent!

I've been kicking around ideas with Kyle about sponsorship. I noticed in the
past that OCLC and DLF had sponsored pre-conference activities.  I'd
appreciate more thoughts on walking the line between maximum exposure for
sponsors and intrusiveness on conference attendees.

--Anj

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Andrew Nagy asn...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Anj - I just wanted to let you know that Serials Solutions is working
 out
 a plan to better support the conference.  We'd possibly like to sponsor an
 evening event, we will have more information for you later in the summer.

 Cheers
 Andrew


 On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Anjanette Young youn...@u.washington.edu
 wrote:

  Code4Lib Seattle 2012 update.  Thanks to Elizabeth Duell of Orbis Cascade
  Alliance and Cary Gordon of chillco.com, we finally have a venue with
  adequate (hopefully) bandwidth and wireless access points, a reasonable
  food
   beverage minimum, and chairs!  The Renaissance Hotel (515 Madison St.,
  Seattle, WA 98104) is located in the chilly heart of downtown Seattle,
  still
  close to the University district, but even closer to the restaurants,
 bars,
  breweries and distilleries in the Belltown, Downtown, Pioneer Square, and
  Capitol Hill neighborhoods.
 
  We could use lots of help, please consider volunteering for a committee:
 
  http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_committees_sign-up_page
 
  --Anj
  --
  Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
  University of Washington Libraries
  Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
  Phone: 206.616.2867
 




-- 
Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
Phone: 206.616.2867

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-14 Thread Frumkin, Jeremy

This might be better for the planning list, but I think we do need a broader 
discussion about our normal approach to working with sponsors. We typically 
have not had sponsored events, and this has been purposeful in intent (last 
year was an exception; I don't believe the topic was brought up with the 
community).

-- jaf

Sent from my iPad

On Jun 14, 2011, at 8:54 AM, Anjanette Young youn...@u.washington.edu wrote:

 Excellent!
 
 I've been kicking around ideas with Kyle about sponsorship. I noticed in the
 past that OCLC and DLF had sponsored pre-conference activities.  I'd
 appreciate more thoughts on walking the line between maximum exposure for
 sponsors and intrusiveness on conference attendees.
 
 --Anj
 
 On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Andrew Nagy asn...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Hi Anj - I just wanted to let you know that Serials Solutions is working
 out
 a plan to better support the conference.  We'd possibly like to sponsor an
 evening event, we will have more information for you later in the summer.
 
 Cheers
 Andrew
 
 
 On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Anjanette Young youn...@u.washington.edu
 wrote:
 
 Code4Lib Seattle 2012 update.  Thanks to Elizabeth Duell of Orbis Cascade
 Alliance and Cary Gordon of chillco.com, we finally have a venue with
 adequate (hopefully) bandwidth and wireless access points, a reasonable
 food
  beverage minimum, and chairs!  The Renaissance Hotel (515 Madison St.,
 Seattle, WA 98104) is located in the chilly heart of downtown Seattle,
 still
 close to the University district, but even closer to the restaurants,
 bars,
 breweries and distilleries in the Belltown, Downtown, Pioneer Square, and
 Capitol Hill neighborhoods.
 
 We could use lots of help, please consider volunteering for a committee:
 
 http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_committees_sign-up_page
 
 --Anj
 --
 Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
 University of Washington Libraries
 Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
 Phone: 206.616.2867
 
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
 University of Washington Libraries
 Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
 Phone: 206.616.2867

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-14 Thread Mark Jordan

Hi Anjanette,

We're just wrapping up the sponsorship drive for Access 2011, and can say we 
learned:

-you can't start soliciting sponsorships too soon; a lot of organizations 
allocate their conference and sponsorship money very early
-before negotiating with sponsors, have a policy on whether sponsorship gets 
them a slot on the program. IIRC there was a long discussion about this on the 
c4l planning list.
-some sponsors might want to distribute branded material, and if you're 
planning on not handing out a log of swag, this might be a problem.

Some of the perks we offered potential sponsors are listed at 
http://access2011.library.ubc.ca/sponsorships/ (in fact some of this might have 
been cribbed from c4l 2011).

Mark

Mark Jordan
Head of Library Systems
W.A.C. Bennett Library, Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada
Voice: 778.782.5753 / Fax: 778.782.3023 / Skype: mark.jordan50
mjor...@sfu.ca

- Original Message -
 Excellent!
 
 I've been kicking around ideas with Kyle about sponsorship. I noticed
 in the
 past that OCLC and DLF had sponsored pre-conference activities. I'd
 appreciate more thoughts on walking the line between maximum exposure
 for
 sponsors and intrusiveness on conference attendees.
 
 --Anj
 
 On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Andrew Nagy asn...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  Hi Anj - I just wanted to let you know that Serials Solutions is
  working
  out
  a plan to better support the conference. We'd possibly like to
  sponsor an
  evening event, we will have more information for you later in the
  summer.
 
  Cheers
  Andrew
 
 
  On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Anjanette Young
  youn...@u.washington.edu
  wrote:
 
   Code4Lib Seattle 2012 update. Thanks to Elizabeth Duell of Orbis
   Cascade
   Alliance and Cary Gordon of chillco.com, we finally have a venue
   with
   adequate (hopefully) bandwidth and wireless access points, a
   reasonable
   food
beverage minimum, and chairs! The Renaissance Hotel (515 Madison
   St.,
   Seattle, WA 98104) is located in the chilly heart of downtown
   Seattle,
   still
   close to the University district, but even closer to the
   restaurants,
  bars,
   breweries and distilleries in the Belltown, Downtown, Pioneer
   Square, and
   Capitol Hill neighborhoods.
  
   We could use lots of help, please consider volunteering for a
   committee:
  
   http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_committees_sign-up_page
  
   --Anj
   --
   Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
   University of Washington Libraries
   Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
   Phone: 206.616.2867
  
 
 
 
 
 --
 Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
 University of Washington Libraries
 Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
 Phone: 206.616.2867

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

When sponsors have sponsored pre-conf activities, that 'sponsoring' of 
pre-confs was just that their staff were the 
presenters/facilitators/instructors at those pre-confs.  So that is more 
exposure, but it was formally unconnected with their sponsorship 
donation -- in the sense that _anyone_ can propose and host a pre-conf 
(and thus get the exposure), if there's space and interest in their 
topic -- you don't need to donate sponsor $$ to do this.


I don't think anyone who's wanted to do a pre-conf has ever been denied 
the chance to do it -- although there's certainly the possibility there 
wouldn't be enough space for all proposed pre-confs at some conf. Would 
it be okay to say sponsors get guaranteed space (effectively bumping 
non-sponsors?).  I dunno, it's pushing it, but probably okay. Only an 
issue if there isnt' enough space for all pre-confs, which hasn't 
happened before.


In the past, sponsors have also had their own advert-inserts in the 
program material given to each attendee, which everyone has thought was 
fine.  And sponsors of course get on the t-shirt, and I think have had 
placards in the registration area too (i forget if those placards 
existed, but I think so, and I think they're fine).


Last year, people were a bit more iffy on a sponsor getting their name 
on a dinner/banquet, and even more so on the sponsor getting to present 
to a captive audience at that dinner/banquet. People generally didn't 
like that idea. People definitely woudln't like the sponsor getting a 
'keynote' during conf program.


Basically, we just want to make sure the conference remains a DIY sort 
of thing where we present and discuss with each other on things we're 
interested in that we decide ourselves as peers, not a program who's 
content is controlled (even in part) by those vendors paying for it.


In the past, we've gotten sponsors to donate with only this. Do we need 
more? Maybe potential sponsors have tighter purse strings then in the 
past.  Or maybe the conf has gotten more expensive such that we need 
more money and thus more incentive to sponsor. (First priority -- try to 
keep the conf from getting more expensive so this doesn't happen).  But 
basically, I'd personally suggest trying to get sponsors without giving 
them more than they've gotten in the past -- but if it becomes clear to 
you that more incentives are needed (perhaps becuase potentials sponsors 
say so) -- I'd just run your ideas for incentives/exposure by the 
listserv (either here or the conf-specific listserv at 
code4lib...@googlegroups.com), and see what the community reaction is. 
In the end, the decision is yours.


Jonathan

On 6/14/2011 11:50 AM, Anjanette Young wrote:

Excellent!

I've been kicking around ideas with Kyle about sponsorship. I noticed in the
past that OCLC and DLF had sponsored pre-conference activities.  I'd
appreciate more thoughts on walking the line between maximum exposure for
sponsors and intrusiveness on conference attendees.

--Anj

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Andrew Nagyasn...@gmail.com  wrote:


Hi Anj - I just wanted to let you know that Serials Solutions is working
out
a plan to better support the conference.  We'd possibly like to sponsor an
evening event, we will have more information for you later in the summer.

Cheers
Andrew


On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Anjanette Youngyoun...@u.washington.edu

wrote:
Code4Lib Seattle 2012 update.  Thanks to Elizabeth Duell of Orbis Cascade
Alliance and Cary Gordon of chillco.com, we finally have a venue with
adequate (hopefully) bandwidth and wireless access points, a reasonable
food
  beverage minimum, and chairs!  The Renaissance Hotel (515 Madison St.,
Seattle, WA 98104) is located in the chilly heart of downtown Seattle,
still
close to the University district, but even closer to the restaurants,

bars,

breweries and distilleries in the Belltown, Downtown, Pioneer Square, and
Capitol Hill neighborhoods.

We could use lots of help, please consider volunteering for a committee:

http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_committees_sign-up_page

--Anj
--
Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
Phone: 206.616.2867

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.


On 6/14/2011 12:14 PM, Mark Jordan wrote:

-before negotiating with sponsors, have a policy on whether sponsorship gets 
them a slot on the program. IIRC there was a long discussion about this on the 
c4l planning list.


That is the thing the community has really not liked the idea of in the 
past. We want our program controlled by ourselves as peers, not by the 
funders.  I think we're all pretty keen on sticking to this, and have 
not needed to violate it in past confs to get funding.



-some sponsors might want to distribute branded material, and if you're 
planning on not handing out a log of swag, this might be a problem.


On the other hand, THIS is something that has been done before, and 
nobody has had a problem with, it seems like a fine idea. Of course, 
presumably the sponsors pay for and provide their own swag or adverts -- 
if the conf pays for that then it obviously diminishes the monetary 
value of the sponsorship (in worst case making it a loss!).



And it's also worth pointing out that all sponsors should be treated the 
same -- if one gets a certain benefit at a certain monetary level, 
everyone at that monetary level should -- the benefits they get at 
monetary levels out to be documented somewhere.


Somewhere in the past I know there's been a documented page with 
sponsorship benefits -- but now I can't find it. Getting people to help 
you find that documented policy/list of benefits sounds like a good 
idea, to use or refine for this year.


The importance of treating all sponsors the same contradicts a bit my 
earlier suggestion about wait and see if sponsors require more -- 
although you could still do wait and see, you'd just have to go back and 
notify people who already committed that now they get more (or could get 
more at a higher level), if you add more. It would get a bit weird 
though.  So I think you're doing well to be thinking about this now, way 
in advance, and ideally create a policy and stick to it.

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-14 Thread Kyle Banerjee

   Or maybe the conf has gotten more expensive such that we need more
 money and thus more incentive to sponsor. (First priority -- try to keep the
 conf from getting more expensive so this doesn't happen)


Costs can be kept down by securing sponsorships, reducing what is provided,
and/or by increasing registration fees. The reality is that people have
gotten accustomed to major costs of c4l effectively being subsidized. Space
and bandwidth are very expensive and when these are generously provided at
low or no cost, it makes c4l look much cheaper than it is.

That there was only one proposal this year is scary, and I suspect part of
the reason there weren't more is because there the number of institutions
willing/able to absorb these costs is limited.

To be healthy in the long run, the conference needs to cover real expenses.
Getting a few dozen people in a room is easy using resources at hand.
Securing a venue that provides hundreds of people with food, fast internet,
etc is significantly more complicated and requires someone to sign a
contract that involves considerable financial exposure.

 ... We want our program controlled by ourselves as peers, not by the
 funders.  I think we're all pretty keen on sticking to this, and have not
 needed to violate it in past confs to get funding.


I don't think that's a barrier to funding. Those who help make things
possible deserve recognition whether their domain name ends in .com, .edu,
or whatever and recognition doesn't imply content control. Anyone interested
in sharing their knowledge and learning should be welcome. Vendor
participation done properly benefits attendees and vendors alike, so we
should be able to find some common ground.

kyle

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.


On 6/14/2011 4:00 PM, Kyle Banerjee wrote:

  Or maybe the conf has gotten more expensive such that we need more
money and thus more incentive to sponsor. (First priority -- try to keep the
conf from getting more expensive so this doesn't happen)


Costs can be kept down by securing sponsorships, reducing what is provided,
and/or by increasing registration fees. The reality is that people have
gotten accustomed to major costs of c4l effectively being subsidized. Space
and bandwidth are very expensive and when these are generously provided at
low or no cost, it makes c4l look much cheaper than it is.


So what I'm curious about, is how did the first 3-4 Code4Lib's manage to 
happen in a way that satisfied us, had low conf registration, and had 
lower sponsorship contributions and lower sponsor privileges than it is 
suggested is now required?


Apparently our _expenses_ (not registration fees, but the overall 
expense column on the conf) have gone up. What happened?  Is it that the 
conf is providing more than it used to be?  If so, does the community 
want a more full-featured conf that has increased sponsorship, or 
instead a conf like it used to be?


Or have the expenses of putting on a conf gone up for reasons other than 
increased services?  Maybe more stuff used to be done by volunteers that 
now needs to be paid for?  I don't know.


Or is something else going on? Maybe the expenses haven't gone up, but 
instead it's harder to get the level of sponsorship we had at those 
first few confs, without giving them more privileges then we did at 
those first few confs?


Basically, what I don't understand is how 'we' managed to do 3-5 conf's 
with low registration fees, and sponsorships that could be acquired by 
only offering limited sponsorship exposure -- but now we can't anymore. 
What has changed?




I don't think that's a barrier to funding. Those who help make things
possible deserve recognition whether their domain name ends in .com, .edu,
or whatever and recognition doesn't imply content control. Anyone interested
in sharing their knowledge and learning should be welcome. Vendor
participation done properly benefits attendees and vendors alike, so we
should be able to find some common ground.


I'm not talking about whether their name ends in .com, .edu, or whatever.

I'm saying I don't like the idea that someone gets time in front of the 
conf because they paid money, rather then because it was decided upon by 
our usual community process (voting on proposals etc).  Anyone 
interested in sharing their knowledge and learning should be welcome, 
but they should not get 20 minutes or an hour in front of a captive 
audience becuase they paid money, rather than becuase the community 
collectively decided we wanted to hear the content, through our usual 
means.   I don't think I'm alone in not liking that.  If this has not 
been neccesary before, what's changed?



It's worth pointing out that vendor's get plenty of benefit (as do all 
other participants) when they simply register their staff in the usual 
way, and the staff comes to the conf as an attendee, presents in the 
usual way (if accepted, or lightning), talk to people over meals and in 
hallways, etc.  We've always had vendor staff participation like this, 
it is indeed good thing (for the vendors exposure, and for the rest of 
us having them there to exchange info with), and I don't expect it would 
stop if we didn't have any sponsors at all. What is at issue isn't 
vendor 'participation', it's sponsorship, how much we need, and what we 
need to offer to get it.

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-14 Thread Kevin S. Clarke

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote:

 So what I'm curious about, is how did the first 3-4 Code4Lib's manage to
 happen in a way that satisfied us, had low conf registration, and had lower
 sponsorship contributions and lower sponsor privileges than it is suggested
 is now required?

Perhaps much of this is information that is now lost to us, but I
think it would be interesting to put up a page with a costs
spreadsheet from each conference so we can get an overall picture of
what's involved (and what's changing from year-to-year).  This would
also, I think, help future hosts as they think about what's involved
with hosting the conference (learn from past experiences).  Concerns,
I guess, would be whether folks (sponsors) would want what they
contributed public knowledge like that (I assume they don't mind since
we've lumped them into levels with amounts associated with them
already, but I'm not positive).  I know we've been sharing these
things via email between hosts but perhaps a more stable location
would be better (and encourage their collection)?  Are these sorts of
things already lost from the early years?

Kevin

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-14 Thread Edward M. Corrado

While I agree with the idea of keeping costs down so as to not rely on sponsors 
as much I am not sure how realistic this is without looking at the numbers. 
Comparing the first one or two conferences with lower attendance at university 
facilities to what we had the last few years is probably not that applicable 
unless we are proposing making a smaller conference (which means restricting 
attendance to a much smaller number). 

Outside of knowing the numbers, if the question is can Organization X (be it a 
commercial vendor, non-profit vendor, university, foundation, etc.) spend Y 
dollars to host something outside of the core Code4Lib conference (be it a 
dinner, reception, trip to a hockey game, pre-conference, or whatever) my 
answer would be as long as the org fully covered all the expenses with 
hopefully a bit left over to cover other conference expenses, I am fine with 
it. Where I would most likely not be fine with is if that organization was 
provided some level of editorial control of the content of the conference 
because of a direct economic incentive they provided. 

Edward

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 14, 2011, at 18:17, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote:

 When sponsors have sponsored pre-conf activities, that 'sponsoring' of 
 pre-confs was just that their staff were the 
 presenters/facilitators/instructors at those pre-confs.  So that is more 
 exposure, but it was formally unconnected with their sponsorship donation -- 
 in the sense that _anyone_ can propose and host a pre-conf (and thus get the 
 exposure), if there's space and interest in their topic -- you don't need to 
 donate sponsor $$ to do this.
 
 I don't think anyone who's wanted to do a pre-conf has ever been denied the 
 chance to do it -- although there's certainly the possibility there wouldn't 
 be enough space for all proposed pre-confs at some conf. Would it be okay to 
 say sponsors get guaranteed space (effectively bumping non-sponsors?).  I 
 dunno, it's pushing it, but probably okay. Only an issue if there isnt' 
 enough space for all pre-confs, which hasn't happened before.
 
 In the past, sponsors have also had their own advert-inserts in the program 
 material given to each attendee, which everyone has thought was fine.  And 
 sponsors of course get on the t-shirt, and I think have had placards in the 
 registration area too (i forget if those placards existed, but I think so, 
 and I think they're fine).
 
 Last year, people were a bit more iffy on a sponsor getting their name on a 
 dinner/banquet, and even more so on the sponsor getting to present to a 
 captive audience at that dinner/banquet. People generally didn't like that 
 idea. People definitely woudln't like the sponsor getting a 'keynote' during 
 conf program.
 
 Basically, we just want to make sure the conference remains a DIY sort of 
 thing where we present and discuss with each other on things we're interested 
 in that we decide ourselves as peers, not a program who's content is 
 controlled (even in part) by those vendors paying for it.
 
 In the past, we've gotten sponsors to donate with only this. Do we need more? 
 Maybe potential sponsors have tighter purse strings then in the past.  Or 
 maybe the conf has gotten more expensive such that we need more money and 
 thus more incentive to sponsor. (First priority -- try to keep the conf from 
 getting more expensive so this doesn't happen).  But basically, I'd 
 personally suggest trying to get sponsors without giving them more than 
 they've gotten in the past -- but if it becomes clear to you that more 
 incentives are needed (perhaps becuase potentials sponsors say so) -- I'd 
 just run your ideas for incentives/exposure by the listserv (either here or 
 the conf-specific listserv at code4lib...@googlegroups.com), and see what the 
 community reaction is. In the end, the decision is yours.
 
 Jonathan
 
 On 6/14/2011 11:50 AM, Anjanette Young wrote:
 Excellent!
 
 I've been kicking around ideas with Kyle about sponsorship. I noticed in the
 past that OCLC and DLF had sponsored pre-conference activities.  I'd
 appreciate more thoughts on walking the line between maximum exposure for
 sponsors and intrusiveness on conference attendees.
 
 --Anj
 
 On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Andrew Nagyasn...@gmail.com  wrote:
 
 Hi Anj - I just wanted to let you know that Serials Solutions is working
 out
 a plan to better support the conference.  We'd possibly like to sponsor an
 evening event, we will have more information for you later in the summer.
 
 Cheers
 Andrew
 
 
 On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Anjanette Youngyoun...@u.washington.edu
 wrote:
 Code4Lib Seattle 2012 update.  Thanks to Elizabeth Duell of Orbis Cascade
 Alliance and Cary Gordon of chillco.com, we finally have a venue with
 adequate (hopefully) bandwidth and wireless access points, a reasonable
 food
   beverage minimum, and chairs!  The Renaissance Hotel (515 Madison St.,
 Seattle, WA 98104) is located in the

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.

2011-06-14 Thread Kyle Banerjee

 So what I'm curious about, is how did the first 3-4 Code4Lib's manage to
 happen in a way that satisfied us, had low conf registration, and had lower
 sponsorship contributions and lower sponsor privileges than it is suggested
 is now required?


I can't speak with authority as I wasn't involved in planning any of them.
But I've done a number of other conferences and I worked at Oregon State for
a long time. My recollection was that facilities and bandwidth were free. No
need to pay for bandwidth or equipment. Generous institutions were
intentionally or unintentionally covering costs. The uni caterer was very
reasonable.

Or have the expenses of putting on a conf gone up for reasons other than
 increased services?  Maybe more stuff used to be done by volunteers that now
 needs to be paid for?  I don't know.


C4l was much smaller then. The smaller the event, the less complicated
things are and the more options you have. There are quite a few regional c4l
events. We held one for a capacity crowd in Portland yesterday. It was about
the same size as the first c4l for roughly the same cost. There is no way
we'd be able to do it so cheaply if we had to triple the size of that same
event.

As size goes up, you find fewer venues capable of hosting it. Space alone
can run well over $20K, equipment and bandwidth can run well into the
thousands, $30K buys very little in terms of food if you're feeding 200+
people -- nonintuitively, the price is often higher per capita than with
smaller groups because of options available or you're required to use a
particular caterer. Mikes, stands, etc all cost money. You'd probably be
amazed what each can of soda and tureen of coffee costs. Food for breaks and
meals is a killer.

In practice, exact charges are hard to nail down because many costs will be
waived or at least reduced substantially depending on what else you get and
factors like room blocks for people coming out of town also make a big
difference. List price if you bought everything a la carte is totally
insane.


 Basically, what I don't understand is how 'we' managed to do 3-5 conf's
 with low registration fees, and sponsorships that could be acquired by only
 offering limited sponsorship exposure -- but now we can't anymore. What has
 changed?


I'm certain the committee will work like crazy to make next year's
conference as cheap as possible while providing a great experience. I expect
costs will go up noticeably because everything actually has to be paid for
at market value in an expensive city.

Anyone interested in sharing their knowledge and learning should be welcome,
 but they should not get 20 minutes or an hour in front of a captive audience
 becuase they paid money, rather than becuase the community collectively
 decided we wanted to hear the content, through our usual means.


I'm not sure I've heard any sentiments to the contrary. Good presentations
and participation in discussions are always welcome, shilling is not. The
how and when of recognition is open to discussion.

It's worth pointing out that vendor's get plenty of benefit (as do all other
 participants) when they simply register their staff in the usual way, and
 the staff comes to the conf as an attendee, presents in the usual way (if
 accepted, or lightning), talk to people over meals and in hallways, etc

 ...What is at issue isn't vendor 'participation', it's sponsorship, how
 much we need, and what we need to offer to get it.


Exactly -- it's all about what's OK and when. My own take is that such
sponsorship should never affect content, but other possibilities are at
least worth discussing.

kyle

Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.