Honestly I'm fine with the elected board helping to make this decision. Folks that want to underwrite the event can submit a proposal to host, board picks from the submissions? Having a wide vote on it seems overkill to me.
Open call for submissions, board votes. Is that unreasonable? - jlk On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Tom Fifield <t...@openstack.org> wrote: > 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 >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators