Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update
I am sure that suggestions will be warmly encouraged. Suggestions that require a ton of work will also be cheerfully encouraged, provided that the work is included. Cary On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Walker, David wrote: >> I doubt anyone is particularly wedded to the > >> particularities of the current theme. > > In fact, some of us dislike it entirely. ;-) > > --Dave > > == > David Walker > Library Web Services Manager > California State University > http://xerxes.calstate.edu > > From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Jonathan > Rochkind [rochk...@jhu.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 1:41 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: 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, Ryan >> 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 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 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 >>>>> 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 >>>>>> Kanewrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Anj, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nice to see your name again after meeting briefly at UW when you >>>>>>> were
Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update
> I doubt anyone is particularly wedded to the > particularities of the current theme. In fact, some of us dislike it entirely. ;-) --Dave == David Walker Library Web Services Manager California State University http://xerxes.calstate.edu From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rochkind [rochk...@jhu.edu] Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 1:41 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: 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, Ryan > 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 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 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 >>>> 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 >>>>> Kanewrote: >>>>> >>>>>> 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 >
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, Ryan 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 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 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 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 Kanewrote: 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 <>. http://code4lib.org/conference< http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2F conference&urlhash=-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 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 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 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 >>> 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 >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> 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 >>>>> <>. >>>>> >>>>> http://code4lib.org/conference< >>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2F >>>>> conference&urlhash=-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
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 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 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 >> 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 wrote: >>> >>>> 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 >>>> <>. >>>> >>>> http://code4lib.org/conference< >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2F >>>> conference&urlhash=-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
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 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 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 >> 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 wrote: >>> 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 <>>> method here>>. http://code4lib.org/conference< http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2Fconference&urlhash=-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
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 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 > 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 wrote: >> >>> 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 <>> method here>>. >>> >>> http://code4lib.org/conference< >>> http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2Fconference&urlhash=-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
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 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 wrote: > >> 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 <> method here>>. >> >> http://code4lib.org/conference< >> http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2Fconference&urlhash=-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
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 wrote: > 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.
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 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" wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Jonathan Rochkind 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.
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.
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 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 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
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 wrote: > 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 < method here>>. > > http://code4lib.org/conference< > http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcode4lib%2Eorg%2Fconference&urlhash=-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.
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Sean Hannan 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.
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.
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" wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Jonathan Rochkind 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 Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Jonathan Rochkind 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 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.
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 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
Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.
In Providence we had little carrot cake whoopie pies at lunch one day, with a fluffy cream cheese filling. On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Cary Gordon wrote: > 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 > wrote: > [snip] > > > > 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. > > > > -- > Cary Gordon > The Cherry Hill Company > http://chillco.com > -- Tania Fersenheim Manager of Library Systems Brandeis University Library and Technology Services 415 South Street, (MS 017/P.O. Box 549110) Waltham, MA 02454-9110 Phone: 781.736.4698 Fax: 781.736.4577 email: tan...@brandeis.edu
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
Re: [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 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 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.
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 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.
> 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.
Just some clarification on the 1st and 3rd c4l conferences: The first code4lib conference had about 85 attendees, and was situated on the Oregon State campus. We still paid for the conference space, food, conference support, shuttle buses to / from downtown, and signed a contract with a nearby hotel that committed us to filling a percentage of rooms. We were able to get about $12k in sponsorships to cover costs and keep the registration fee to $100. 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. Without knowing the specifics of the amount of sponsorship needed for code4lib Seattle, I still believe that we can likely get the required sponsorship needed to make the conference break even and to keep the registration costs in line with prior code4libs, without the need to look at new forms of sponsorship. If the sponsorship amount is more in the range of Portland than Corvallis, then we should make a concerted effort to bring together a hard-working sponsorship committee and start working on this now. Tangental to all of this, btw, is the question of any proceeds from code4lib Bloomington being transferred to this year's conference - this year's hosts should probably contact Indiana to check into this. -- jaf Jeremy Frumkin Assistant Dean / Chief Technology Strategist University of Arizona Libraries +1 520.626.7296 frumk...@u.library.arizona.edu "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted."‹Albert Einstein On 6/14/11 3:19 PM, "Joe Hourcle" wrote: >On Jun 14, 2011, at 5:34 PM, Kyle Banerjee 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? >>> >> >> 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. > >I suspect that this is likely a large chunk of the difference ... > >When I worked for a university, we could get space for cheap (student >groups could get it for free), and internet access was free, too. > >When you grow to the size that you have to look at conference centers / >hotels / whatever to hold the event, it gets expensive very, very quickly. > >And thinking that the 'free' wireless that some conference centers offer >is adequate for a decent size group of geeks is a joke ... I'm actually >at a conference right now, and it crapped out entirely today. (and as >there's no afternoon sessions for today, I think they might've given up >on fixing it ... a few of us started advertising SIDs like 'convention >center >wifi sucks' ... and then it went downhill from there.) > >... > >One other thing to consider is location -- some places just cost more. >You likely wouldn't hold a conference in downtown New York city. >(Although, I did once go to one that was held in a middle school on >Roosevelt Island) > >Unfortunately, the cheaper places may not be as well connected >(larger airports nearby, etc.) so even if you're able to keep the >costs of running the conference down, the cost to attendees might >not.(eg, I'm currently in Las Cruces, New Mexico ... but the closest >airport was El Paso, so it almost required people to rent a car >(we tried coordinating flights to reduce the number of cars, but >there were so many delayed flights, etc, that it turned into a >nightmare unless people were on the exact same flight) > >Universities nearby can help, if the conference is in the summer >or when their dorms aren't in use ... some offer renting out their >rooms by the day if it's for a university-affiliated event. > >... > > >One other option, rather than sponsorship is grants -- if this were >a science related conference, you could put in for a grant from NSF. >I've gone through the IMLS grants, and the only one that seems >like it might fi
Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.
I was the events manager for the Drupal Association, for the past few years, and our conferences have gone from mid 30s to over 3,000 in the US and 1,200 in Europe. We are expecting over 1,500 for our London conference in August. Having outgrown the hotel rooms and free venues that we had through 2007, we set a goal of keeping the ticket price under $400 for the events that included food. This has meant that we need sponsors to cover about half of the revenue. We need to have positive cash-flow on our conferences in order to cover percs such as servers. Even though it is free software, folks really expect those to work. It has been tough to define what support activities are appropriate. We haven't gotten to selling naming rights -- the Oracle DrupalCon... Nice ring. We do provide an exhibit space and a lot of branding opportunities in the program and on swag-bags. There is a certain synergy between us and our sponsors. Hosting companies, for example, are frequent sponsors and also take part in a sponsored referral service (clearly identifies) on our website. While not perfect, it does give us a channel to let providers know if they are doing a good job. Hosting companies that do not behave ethically or reliably are given the boot. While I think that Code4Lib is a pretty singular event, I don't think that it is harmed by being open to sponsorship. I, for one, would love to see some major ILS vendor get actively involved, if only to see how they would respond to being called on every bogus promise of openness they've made. Thanks, Cary -- Cary Gordon The Cherry Hill Company http://chillco.com
Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.
On Jun 14, 2011, at 5:34 PM, Kyle Banerjee 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? >> > > 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. I suspect that this is likely a large chunk of the difference ... When I worked for a university, we could get space for cheap (student groups could get it for free), and internet access was free, too. When you grow to the size that you have to look at conference centers / hotels / whatever to hold the event, it gets expensive very, very quickly. And thinking that the 'free' wireless that some conference centers offer is adequate for a decent size group of geeks is a joke ... I'm actually at a conference right now, and it crapped out entirely today. (and as there's no afternoon sessions for today, I think they might've given up on fixing it ... a few of us started advertising SIDs like 'convention center wifi sucks' ... and then it went downhill from there.) ... One other thing to consider is location -- some places just cost more. You likely wouldn't hold a conference in downtown New York city. (Although, I did once go to one that was held in a middle school on Roosevelt Island) Unfortunately, the cheaper places may not be as well connected (larger airports nearby, etc.) so even if you're able to keep the costs of running the conference down, the cost to attendees might not.(eg, I'm currently in Las Cruces, New Mexico ... but the closest airport was El Paso, so it almost required people to rent a car (we tried coordinating flights to reduce the number of cars, but there were so many delayed flights, etc, that it turned into a nightmare unless people were on the exact same flight) Universities nearby can help, if the conference is in the summer or when their dorms aren't in use ... some offer renting out their rooms by the day if it's for a university-affiliated event. ... One other option, rather than sponsorship is grants -- if this were a science related conference, you could put in for a grant from NSF. I've gone through the IMLS grants, and the only one that seems like it might fit is the "Laura Bush 21st Century Librarian Program" : http://www.imls.gov/applicants/grants/21centuryLibrarian.shtm Does anyone know of any other government or foundation grants that could be used for conferences? -Joe
Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.
On 6/14/2011 5:34 PM, Kyle Banerjee wrote: 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. I think this is probably a large part of it. As Kyle says, a larger conf ends up costing more per-seat. (At least until you get even much more larger). So, not neccesarily for this year, becuase the venue is already in place and such, but we the community should collectively consider: Do we want the larger (then the first 1-4 years) conf we've got, which requires more sponsorship and such? Or we rather have a conf the size of the first few years, knowing that means fewer people will get to go, but that it will be easier to put on, cheaper, and require less sponsorship? It is not set in stone that C4L conf needs to keep getting larger and larger every year. And there are downsides to the conf planning and budget. Also, I think there are some 'extras' that we should not neccesarily assume are mandatory: Kyle mentions food at meals and breaks as being killer expenses. The food at meals is probably non-negotiable (although breakfast might be), but food at breaks? If I were on the conf planning committe and that were a significant expense, I'd say, eh, skip it, code4lib is not supposed to be a fancy ass conf, we don't need granola bars and soda at our break (and I'm pretty sure we didn't have such at the first 1-4 confs; I don't think we even had 'free' breakfast neccesarily, as we did last year and maybe the year before.). I think the general trend of code4lib getting more and more expensive to put on every year, with more and more amenities, should be resisted. The trend is becuase everyone figures they should do everything that was done previously, and oh, hey, let's increase conf capacity just 20 or 30 seats too, we can manage it, and hey, let's add food at breaks too, it doesn't add THAT much. And then the next year, thinks they have to do everything previous and then adds in a few more too. And the complexity, expsense, and amount of work conf organizers (volunteers!) have to do keeps edging up and up, and it's harder and harder to pull off how we want. We should figure out how to resist that trend.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.
> 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.
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 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 Nagy 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>>> 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 Ho
Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Jonathan Rochkind 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.
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.
> 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 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.
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 Nagy 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 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.
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 > 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 > > > >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.
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" 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 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 >> 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.
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 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 >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.
Thanks for setting this up, Anj! Once the committees have some more names attached to them, you may want to identify a lead for each. I'm excited about #c4l12 already. -Mike On Jun 7, 2011 12:16 PM, "Anjanette Young" wrote:
Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2012 Seattle Update.
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 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.
Thanks for the reminder. Dates: Feb 6 - 9, 2012. --Anjanette On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Jay Luker wrote: > Hi Anjanette, > > Does this mean you've settled on dates? > > --jay > > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Anjanette Young > 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.
Hi Anjanette, Does this mean you've settled on dates? --jay On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Anjanette Young 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.
Anj, I justed finished my first year as a MLIS student at the iSchool (UW). I'd love to help coordinate the meetup. Contact me personally to sort out a meeting. Thanks, Tod Robbins
