Hi all,
Thanks Michael, your set up a list of good points to keep in mind
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 at 20:12, michael terner wrote:
>
>- *Financial Involvement by OSGeo *
> - Sharing the risk beyond providing advances
> - Active *work* to help insure the financial health of the
>
I support reassessing the FOSS4G modus operandi to ensure it stays fresh and
relevant to the OSGeo communities and markets and keeps up to date with
changing realities. Indeed it should be open to evolving from year to year.
I think the essence of FOSS4G moving around the world and being a
Well said Sanghee.
As a former member of the LOC for FOSS4G-2009 I agree with the local community
development argument, though in our case it led to a lot of burn-out.
There is also the practicality of finding a conference organiser that can
operate effectively anywhere in the world.
Should
Hi all,
I prefer option 1.
If this poll was asked just after FOSS4G Seoul 2015, I would have selected
option 2 without any hesitations.
However I now realize that I, LOC members, and local community had learned a
lot by going through the difficulties of preparing the event altogether. That
+2 from me
Everyone is welcome to participate in the conversation about changes to the
organisation of FOSS4G, then the Conference Ctee should vote and make a
recommendation (or recommendations) to the Board and the Board should decide.
Our organisational model is that the charter members
Hi Maxi,
Thanks! I completely agree with those type of changes indeed. It makes sense we
have a list of scenario’s forward and have a vote on that by the community.
For what the membership of the conference committee is concerned, I left simply
because of the supposed/imposed barrier of not
Dear Jeroen,
Thanks for your considerations.
I wasn't proposing to extend the evaluation of proposals to the whole
community. I understand a dedicated committee should do this (even though I
believe a part of the evaluation of a proposal could be assigned by votes
of the community, maybe 10%?).
Hi Maxi,
Thanks for sharing your view on this. Although I sympathize with the idea of a
whole community having a say in how conference locations is selected and
organized, I’m not in favor of the process you propose. Reading LOI’s and full
proposals takes a lot of time and voting a lot of
Hi Maxi and all,
On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 7:15 AM Massimiliano Cannata <
massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch> wrote:
> Dear conference community,
> why is the community left out from this decision / discussion?
>
All are free to discuss and have been for years.
>
> The FOSS4G conference is a
Dear conference community,
why is the community left out from this decision / discussion?
The FOSS4G conference is a property of OSGeo, and therefore of the
community as a whole.
The conference committee has not been elected so cannot decide in
representation of the community.
As an OPEN
10 matches
Mail list logo
