++1
Il gio 13 gen 2022, 07:46 Jeroen Ticheler via Discuss <
discuss@lists.osgeo.org> ha scritto:
> +1 Very well said Mark!
>
> Jeroen (fellow idiot)
>
> Op 13 jan. 2022 om 03:14 heeft Mark Iliffe via Discuss <
> discuss@lists.osgeo.org> het volgende geschreven:
>
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I would
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 10:50 PM Jonathan Moules via Discuss
wrote:
> On the surface, this is a good idea, but unfortunately it has a fundamental
> problem:
> There are no "criteria for selection" of the conference beyond "the committee
> members voted for this proposal". There's zero
On Wed, 12 Jan 2022 at 16:45, Michael Smith via Discuss
wrote:
>
> I would say that its probably best to think about Hybrid, as this is what is
> happening for 2022. Essentially you are both right, there are pluses and
> minuses to each. And we want to support both going forward as there isn’t
+1 Very well said Mark!
Jeroen (fellow idiot)
> Op 13 jan. 2022 om 03:14 heeft Mark Iliffe via Discuss
> het volgende geschreven:
>
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I would like to start this email with the caveat, statement, and admission
> that "I am an idiot" to ensure all are provided with the
Hi Everyone,
I would like to start this email with the caveat, statement, and admission
that "*I am an idiot*" to ensure all are provided with the requisite
informed context.
The environmental concerns of holding a conference are immense, that we
would be reticent not to consider. I for one love
The problem with the social interaction arguments is the massive
environmental cost.
It's about 22,000 km round trip from either NW USA or West Europe to
Buenos Aires, Argentina for example.
Depending on the calculator you use, that's about 4 tonnes of CO2 for
the round trip. The world target
Dear (OS)Geo friends,
> > we really hope that FOSS4G2023 can be safely > organized in
> > physical format.
>> Why?
>>> Because we humans are social animals; and people like me, who are almost
completely burnt out by not having been outside of their houses for nearly
>>> two years, could
I think if a group of individuals[1], or several groups, want to put
forward proposals for the conference to be located in "Cyberspace"[2] then
that should not be disallowed, and then its up to the conference committee
to consider it fairly according to the criteria for selection.
Barry
[1] Not
I would say that its probably best to think about Hybrid, as this is what is
happening for 2022. Essentially you are both right, there are pluses and
minuses to each. And we want to support both going forward as there isn’t going
to be an approach that works for everyone. Future FOSS4Gs will
Hi,
This is my personal opinion as co-chair of FOSS4G 2021 and not any
official OSGeo statement. Take it with a grain of salt. I am still
recovering from the burnout of organizing it, so I may be very biased
:)
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 3:42 PM Jonathan Moules via Discuss
wrote:
> Why? If it can
El miércoles, 12 de enero de 2022 15:26:05 (CET) Jonathan Moules via Discuss
escribió:
> > we really hope that FOSS4G2023 can be safely
> > organized in physical format.
>
> Why?
Because we humans are social animals; and people like me, who are almost
completely burnt out by not having been
Hi Vasile,
> 2021 was the proof that a successful FOSS4G can be organized in
virtual form as well.
Which is great to hear!
But in that case, the following statements raises a question
> we really hope that FOSS4G2023 can be safely organized in physical
format.
Why? If it can be held in a
Dear OSGeo/FOSS4G Community,
Although the fight against COVID-19 is not over yet, we need to think and act
to keep the FOSS4G spirit alive and to have our beloved global conference
hosted in 2023. That's why OSGeo's Conference Committee is happy to announce
that the call for location for the
13 matches
Mail list logo
