Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg]
Hi Sophie, Sophie wrote on 2010-01-11 14.17: Sorry for jumping late, I've health problems and I'm not really available. But this is important. I hope you get well soon! Take care! From what I see, most of the active community members have no lead role in the project. Most of the people doing l10n, QA or documentation have no other title than community contributor but each of them is as important as any other. Sorry if you got the wrong impression by my sentence. I did not mean that their work is not so important as the work of people with titles. What I meant is that it might be no coincidence that always the same people, and also lots of people with roles/titles amongst them, request money. It might give the impression that only a few people get funded, but basically, it's often a only a handful of people doing trips or other things that require funding. That's what I wanted to express -- that we don't give more money to people with roles than to others. ;-) The issue I get with those face2face meetings organized in Hamburg is that they are often organized off list. Rosana came last week with the request of funding a team, great and nothing to say about it, but what if some of us would have been willing to participate, even on our own budget ? I agree that this time the planning and the communication was not good -- but no one is to blame here. This time it was necessary. Please wait for our summary so you see why. Again, I agree that it was basically not the right way and it should not be normal -- but when you see our summary, you know why. In the meantime, please trust me. :-) For me, it's very difficult to feel that I belong to a community process when I'm not able to take part at the heart of it. How do you feel involved in that case ? It's not only a marketing issue here, but branding is not only marketing also, it concerns the art project, the NLC, UX also. This is something frustrating for those who are willing to invest time and/or resources/money in a project or a decision process and they are not invited nor informed to participate to an important part of it. I absolutely agree that we need to take care not to form inner circles excluding others, and that we need to take care of using the lists as often as possible. This is one of my personal goals I set myself, and I hope we can work on it and improve it throughout the project. Virtual conferencing system should be evaluated also as a tool for the OOo project and not only on a marketing point of view. It should be evaluated at a infrastructure level to enhance the community participation and reinforcement. So the budget should be supported as a community wide one and not only on the marketing one. The marketing action here is marketing the community ;) I think the marketing can be a good start, but for sure, the goal would be to have this infrastructure for all the community. As you can see, I'm currently playing with some tools to see where we can get. :-) Florian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org
Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg]
On 1/10/10 10:07 PM, Gianvittorio wrote: Christine and all, I am a managing director for a software company. In my daily job we have a planning process that starts in september and ends in december. January we start the year and we have budget set aside for all the activities planned for the year (plus 10% I set aside for tactical activities). I think we should start with a plan, that way the decision of whether to participate or not and who, would have already been taken at the moment of approving the budget. Gian i agree that we need a plan for at least one year to have an overview of our activities. And of course a clear goal. A list of events where we want to be present etc. But the decision if we can attend or who will attend is often depending on the event and the decision made there. Speakers for example are selected often short in front of an event. You see it would be difficult to nail this down before. And i think this is not necessary. We should more plan with fix budgets and should modify the numbers over time when we have more and more experience with the events and know how much money is needed. And often people get paid by their companies and don't need a sponsoring. This is also difficult to plan and depends on various things. A minimum requirement for me for an event is to have a booth or stand with a demo and info material and staffed with a minimum of 2-3 people, so that at least one person is there at any time. Or to give a talk about OpenOffice.org. Juergen On Sun 10/01/10 18:35 , Christine Louise Beems christ...@gozarks.com sent: I'd like to (if at all possible) pull this thread together with all the other various requests for funding but not in context of 'approving' (or disapproving)... only as an open forum for discussing what 'we' (the Community) agree to as appropriate expenditures from our marketing purse. That is, in terms of adopting a marketing plan this seems a vital consideration because there are many, many, many 'right' (correct, good and proper) ways and things upon which one can spend money, thus unless this resource is limitless allocation decisions must be made. And I agree very much with Florian, that 'trust among leadership/volunteers' is essential for any organization to exist, let alone thrive. Still, in context of developing an organization with a 'high trust culture', there are certain fundamental 'controls' or 'guidlines' which leadership must adhere to and (if necessary, hopefully gently and politely) 'enforce' in order to demonstrate 'trustworthyness' in terms of allocating resources from the coummunity purse to any various or particular project. Yet the fact is that until such standards (controls, guidelines) are agreed upon by community consensus, it is impossible for leadership to demonstrate trustworthyness in the administration of community goods. Thus the critical importance of deliberately thinking these things through and arriving as some sort of general agreement which outlines the 'appropriate uses' of the marketing budget and prioritizes expenditures of resources in context of our overarching strategic marketing plan. Point of reference -- In the mainstream commercial/industrial universe, there are only 2 acceptable types of expenditures from a 'marketing budget'. The project and it's related costs (be these travel, brochure production, website development, newsletter distribution, etc.) *must* seek to either intice new customers or reward existing customers -- and optimally it must do both of these at the same time. And while there are many various elements of the mainstream commercial/industrial universe that I personally believe should be abandoned, I also believe there are certain practices which work rather well, with the qualitative judgement here being pronounced with respect to 'How well does the policy (standard, guideline, control) serve to empower the well-being of the whole?' With 'the whole' in this instance being already clearly defined as 'the strategic marketing of OOo' Again, just my 3cents. However, I will share that my (strong) opinions are the derivatives of 40+ years of hands-on participation with various 'good works' groups (including government) as a volunteer -and- an equal number of for-profit organizations in a paid-professional capacity. And still, that and $1-US will get you a cup of regular coffee at McDonald's everywhere... . ~Christine - Original Message - From: Florian Effenberger floeff@ openoffice.orgTo: dev@marketing.openoffice.orgSent: Saturday, January 09, 2010 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg] Hi Alexandro, first of all, thanks for agreeing to the funding of the meeting. I hope that we can go on with the process now and that nobody is upset. In good faith, I just booked the hotel and the train, so prices don't explode. :-) I rather move the conversation to a
Re: Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg]
Juergen, I am new to the OO world. What you say sounds reasonable and I all for structuring (a bit, not too much). Gian On Mon 11/01/10 09:39 , Juergen Schmidt juergen.schm...@sun.com sent: On 1/10/10 10:07 PM, Gianvittorio wrote: Christine and all, I am a managing director for a software company. In my daily job we have a planning process that starts in september and ends in december. January we start the year and we have budget set aside for all the activities planned for the year (plus 10% I set aside for tactical activities). I think we should start with a plan, that way the decision of whether to participate or not and who, would have already been taken at the moment of approving the budget. Gian i agree that we need a plan for at least one year to have an overview of our activities. And of course a clear goal. A list of events where we want to be present etc. But the decision if we can attend or who will attend is often depending on the event and the decision made there. Speakers for example are selected often short in front of an event. You see it would be difficult to nail this down before. And i think this is not necessary. We should more plan with fix budgets and should modify the numbers over time when we have more and more experience with the events and know how much money is needed. And often people get paid by their companies and don't need a sponsoring. This is also difficult to plan and depends on various things. A minimum requirement for me for an event is to have a booth or stand with a demo and info material and staffed with a minimum of 2-3 people, so that at least one person is there at any time. Or to give a talk about OpenOffice.org. Juergen On Sun 10/01/10 18:35 , Christine Louise Beems christi n...@gozarks.com sent: I'd like to (if at all possible) pull this thread together with all the other various requests for funding but not in context of 'approving' (or disapproving)... only as an open forum for discussing what 'we' (the Community) agree to as appropriate expenditures from our marketing purse. That is, in terms of adopting a marketing plan this seems a vital consideration because there are many, many, many 'right' (correct, good and proper) ways and things upon which one can spend money, thus unless this resource is limitless allocation decisions must be made. And I agree very much with Florian, that 'trust among leadership/volunteers' is essential for any organization to exist, let alone thrive. Still, in context of developing an organization with a 'high trust culture', there are certain fundamental 'controls' or 'guidlines' which leadership must adhere to and (if necessary, hopefully gently and politely) 'enforce' in order to demonstrate 'trustworthyness' in terms of allocating resources from the coummunity purse to any various or particular project. Yet the fact is that until such standards (controls, guidelines) are agreed upon by community consensus, it is impossible for leadership to demonstrate trustworthyness in the administration of community goods. Thus the critical importance of deliberately thinking these things through and arriving as some sort of general agreement which outlines the 'appropriate uses' of the marketing budget and prioritizes expenditures of resources in context of our overarching strategic marketing plan. Point of reference -- In the mainstream commercial/industrial universe, there are only 2 acceptable types of expenditures from a 'marketing budget'. The project and it's related costs (be these travel, brochure production, website development, newsletter distribution, etc.) *must* seek to either intice new customers or reward existing customers -- and optimally it must do both of these at the same time. And while there are many various elements of the mainstream commercial/industrial universe that I personally believe should be abandoned, I also believe there are certain practices which work rather well, with the qualitative judgement here being pronounced with respect to 'How well does the policy (standard, guideline, control) serve to empower the well-being of the whole?' With 'the whole' in this instance being already clearly defined as 'the strategic marketing of OOo' Again, just my 3cents. However, I will share that my (strong) opinions are the derivatives of 40+ years of hands-on participation with various 'good works' groups (including government) as a volunteer -and- an equal number of for-profit organizations in a paid-professional capacity. And still, that and $1-US will get you a cup of regular coffee at McDonald's everywhere... . ~Christine - Original Message - From: Florian Effenberger floeff@ openoffice.orgTo: dev@marketing.openoffice.orgSent: Saturday, January 09, 2010 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity
Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg]
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 7:17 AM, Sophie sgautier@free.fr wrote: Hi all, Sorry for jumping late, I've health problems and I'm not really available. But this is important. Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi Alexandro, first of all, thanks for agreeing to the funding of the meeting. I hope that we can go on with the process now and that nobody is upset. In good faith, I just booked the hotel and the train, so prices don't explode. :-) I rather move the conversation to a new thread, about the discussion on face to face vs virtual meetings. Is easy to say that face to face is better, is harder to justify who should be involved into this face to face and why. Does his tittle makes him eligible just because he is the lead, or his nearbyness is the main factor that can make him viable for him even if he/she is not the best person just because face to face is better. Well, in the past we never judged a funding request by the title or role of a person. Sure, we checked who requested the funding, but we never looked at titles to base our decision on. I agree that often people with titles/roles request funding, but that's mostly due to the fact that active people usually hold these jobs inside the project, and therefore also have to request funding quite often. From what I see, most of the active community members have no lead role in the project. Most of the people doing l10n, QA or documentation have no other title than community contributor but each of them is as important as any other. The issue I get with those face2face meetings organized in Hamburg is that they are often organized off list. Rosana came last week with the request of funding a team, great and nothing to say about it, but what if some of us would have been willing to participate, even on our own budget ? This has already been the same with the QA meetings, UX and may be others I forgot about. For me, it's very difficult to feel that I belong to a community process when I'm not able to take part at the heart of it. How do you feel involved in that case ? It's not only a marketing issue here, but branding is not only marketing also, it concerns the art project, the NLC, UX also. This is something frustrating for those who are willing to invest time and/or resources/money in a project or a decision process and they are not invited nor informed to participate to an important part of it. Virtual conferencing system should be evaluated also as a tool for the OOo project and not only on a marketing point of view. It should be evaluated at a infrastructure level to enhance the community participation and reinforcement. So the budget should be supported as a community wide one and not only on the marketing one. The marketing action here is marketing the community ;) That's why I feel about investing much more money shouldnt come from the Marketing budget but from the infrastructure budget, and that's why I feel more investment should take place like buying VoIP phones, or quality microphones to the people the matter the most to the project. While at the same time invest into an infrastructure that is sufficient to pay for the minutes and services or the management of a VoIP (asterisk) infrastructure for such phones. I am not a big IP Telephony guy but I do know that there are free alternatives like TinyChat, Stickam, Ustream and others, however usually I found people with not the correct microphone, bad connectivity or have to rush into setting up their systems. I participate with organizations like my stock brokers that use a lot of Webinars through WebEX and GoToMeeting, I hate them because is a Windows/OS specific, but I do know that there are alternatives like Elluminate that handles Linux as well (but sucks at it on my distro). So I don't have a silver bullet here, but I know that this is possible to do cheap or on the free side. Kind regards Sophie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org -- Alexandro Colorado OpenOffice.org Espantilde;ol IM: j...@jabber.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg]
I'd like to (if at all possible) pull this thread together with all the other various requests for funding but not in context of 'approving' (or disapproving)... only as an open forum for discussing what 'we' (the Community) agree to as appropriate expenditures from our marketing purse. That is, in terms of adopting a marketing plan this seems a vital consideration because there are many, many, many 'right' (correct, good and proper) ways and things upon which one can spend money, thus unless this resource is limitless allocation decisions must be made. And I agree very much with Florian, that 'trust among leadership/volunteers' is essential for any organization to exist, let alone thrive. Still, in context of developing an organization with a 'high trust culture', there are certain fundamental 'controls' or 'guidlines' which leadership must adhere to and (if necessary, hopefully gently and politely) 'enforce' in order to demonstrate 'trustworthyness' in terms of allocating resources from the coummunity purse to any various or particular project. Yet the fact is that until such standards (controls, guidelines) are agreed upon by community consensus, it is impossible for leadership to demonstrate trustworthyness in the administration of community goods. Thus the critical importance of deliberately thinking these things through and arriving as some sort of general agreement which outlines the 'appropriate uses' of the marketing budget and prioritizes expenditures of resources in context of our overarching strategic marketing plan. Point of reference -- In the mainstream commercial/industrial universe, there are only 2 acceptable types of expenditures from a 'marketing budget'. The project and it's related costs (be these travel, brochure production, website development, newsletter distribution, etc.) *must* seek to either intice new customers or reward existing customers -- and optimally it must do both of these at the same time. And while there are many various elements of the mainstream commercial/industrial universe that I personally believe should be abandoned, I also believe there are certain practices which work rather well, with the qualitative judgement here being pronounced with respect to 'How well does the policy (standard, guideline, control) serve to empower the well-being of the whole?' With 'the whole' in this instance being already clearly defined as 'the strategic marketing of OOo' Again, just my 3cents. However, I will share that my (strong) opinions are the derivatives of 40+ years of hands-on participation with various 'good works' groups (including government) as a volunteer -and- an equal number of for-profit organizations in a paid-professional capacity. And still, that and $1-US will get you a cup of regular coffee at McDonald's everywhere... grin. ~Christine - Original Message - From: Florian Effenberger flo...@openoffice.org To: dev@marketing.openoffice.org Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2010 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg] Hi Alexandro, first of all, thanks for agreeing to the funding of the meeting. I hope that we can go on with the process now and that nobody is upset. In good faith, I just booked the hotel and the train, so prices don't explode. :-) I rather move the conversation to a new thread, about the discussion on face to face vs virtual meetings. Is easy to say that face to face is better, is harder to justify who should be involved into this face to face and why. Does his tittle makes him eligible just because he is the lead, or his nearbyness is the main factor that can make him viable for him even if he/she is not the best person just because face to face is better. Well, in the past we never judged a funding request by the title or role of a person. Sure, we checked who requested the funding, but we never looked at titles to base our decision on. I agree that often people with titles/roles request funding, but that's mostly due to the fact that active people usually hold these jobs inside the project, and therefore also have to request funding quite often. While I agree that some sort of controlling is important, I also would like to think about trust. Most is based on trust. When we as budget holders get asked for travel funding for a specific event in a foreign country, we normally don't know much about it -- neither the country, nor the event, and also not about local prices. I have to trust the people when they tell me this event is important and they have long and expensive flights. Of course, I do some checking, but without trust, it wouldn't work. I also see that we are in a slightly different situation, all of us. While I enjoy living in Germany, thus being able to attend many events, having quite cheap transportation and lodging costs compared to other countries, and lots of
Re: Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg]
This is a great idea, in the past I submitted a list of events that louis requested, but that list was not contributed further on the list. Maybe we could re-use this list and start taking shots at it. On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Gianvittorio gianvitto...@zandona.nl wrote: Christine and all, I am a managing director for a software company. In my daily job we have a planning process that starts in september and ends in december. January we start the year and we have budget set aside for all the activities planned for the year (plus 10% I set aside for tactical activities). I think we should start with a plan, that way the decision of whether to participate or not and who, would have already been taken at the moment of approving the budget. Gian On Sun 10/01/10 18:35 , Christine Louise Beems christ...@gozarks.com sent: I'd like to (if at all possible) pull this thread together with all the other various requests for funding but not in context of 'approving' (or disapproving)... only as an open forum for discussing what 'we' (the Community) agree to as appropriate expenditures from our marketing purse. That is, in terms of adopting a marketing plan this seems a vital consideration because there are many, many, many 'right' (correct, good and proper) ways and things upon which one can spend money, thus unless this resource is limitless allocation decisions must be made. And I agree very much with Florian, that 'trust among leadership/volunteers' is essential for any organization to exist, let alone thrive. Still, in context of developing an organization with a 'high trust culture', there are certain fundamental 'controls' or 'guidlines' which leadership must adhere to and (if necessary, hopefully gently and politely) 'enforce' in order to demonstrate 'trustworthyness' in terms of allocating resources from the coummunity purse to any various or particular project. Yet the fact is that until such standards (controls, guidelines) are agreed upon by community consensus, it is impossible for leadership to demonstrate trustworthyness in the administration of community goods. Thus the critical importance of deliberately thinking these things through and arriving as some sort of general agreement which outlines the 'appropriate uses' of the marketing budget and prioritizes expenditures of resources in context of our overarching strategic marketing plan. Point of reference -- In the mainstream commercial/industrial universe, there are only 2 acceptable types of expenditures from a 'marketing budget'. The project and it's related costs (be these travel, brochure production, website development, newsletter distribution, etc.) *must* seek to either intice new customers or reward existing customers -- and optimally it must do both of these at the same time. And while there are many various elements of the mainstream commercial/industrial universe that I personally believe should be abandoned, I also believe there are certain practices which work rather well, with the qualitative judgement here being pronounced with respect to 'How well does the policy (standard, guideline, control) serve to empower the well-being of the whole?' With 'the whole' in this instance being already clearly defined as 'the strategic marketing of OOo' Again, just my 3cents. However, I will share that my (strong) opinions are the derivatives of 40+ years of hands-on participation with various 'good works' groups (including government) as a volunteer -and- an equal number of for-profit organizations in a paid-professional capacity. And still, that and $1-US will get you a cup of regular coffee at McDonald's everywhere... . ~Christine - Original Message - From: Florian Effenberger floeff@ openoffice.orgTo: dev@marketing.openoffice.orgSent: Saturday, January 09, 2010 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg] Hi Alexandro, first of all, thanks for agreeing to the funding of the meeting. I hope that we can go on with the process now and that nobody is upset. In good faith, I just booked the hotel and the train, so prices don't explode. :-) I rather move the conversation to a new thread, about the discussion on face to face vs virtual meetings. Is easy to say that face to face is better, is harder to justify who should be involved into this face to face and why. Does his tittle makes him eligible just because he is the lead, or his nearbyness is the main factor that can make him viable for him even if he/she is not the best person just because face to face is better. Well, in the past we never judged a funding request by the title or role of a person. Sure, we checked who requested the funding, but we never looked at titles to base our decision on. I agree that often people with titles/roles request funding, but that's mostly due to the fact that active people usually hold these jobs inside the project, and therefore
Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg]
Hi Alexandro, first of all, thanks for agreeing to the funding of the meeting. I hope that we can go on with the process now and that nobody is upset. In good faith, I just booked the hotel and the train, so prices don't explode. :-) I rather move the conversation to a new thread, about the discussion on face to face vs virtual meetings. Is easy to say that face to face is better, is harder to justify who should be involved into this face to face and why. Does his tittle makes him eligible just because he is the lead, or his nearbyness is the main factor that can make him viable for him even if he/she is not the best person just because face to face is better. Well, in the past we never judged a funding request by the title or role of a person. Sure, we checked who requested the funding, but we never looked at titles to base our decision on. I agree that often people with titles/roles request funding, but that's mostly due to the fact that active people usually hold these jobs inside the project, and therefore also have to request funding quite often. While I agree that some sort of controlling is important, I also would like to think about trust. Most is based on trust. When we as budget holders get asked for travel funding for a specific event in a foreign country, we normally don't know much about it -- neither the country, nor the event, and also not about local prices. I have to trust the people when they tell me this event is important and they have long and expensive flights. Of course, I do some checking, but without trust, it wouldn't work. I also see that we are in a slightly different situation, all of us. While I enjoy living in Germany, thus being able to attend many events, having quite cheap transportation and lodging costs compared to other countries, and lots of OOo stuff is going on there, I see that others who live far away have it much harder, and their demands and needs are quite different. On the other hand, some people enjoy a good income or getting funded by their employer, while for me paying a trip to Hamburg means spending more money than I have in one month. No cinema, no going out etc. for one month. I think we should try to accept, respect and understand everyone's situation. I also see that there are many different views on various topics. It's no secret that I'm in favor of having even *more* personal meetings, because to my experience, it helps a lot. I also accept that others cannot make it due to time reasons, or do not want to because of carbon footprint and saving the environment. Everything is a valid reason. We all work on the same common goal, and some work one way, others choose another way. I think it can't harm to work on things in parallel and again, trusting people. When I think it's important to have some face to face meetings or attend several events, I wish for some trust. The same is true when others have different requirements. We are a project full of so many different people, so one opinion might not fit everyone. I'm talking openly because we're an open source project and we should decide on our goals, ways and also money together. As said, the budget is not my budget, it is our budget. Openly said, and I see that this might not be ok for everyone, my wishes for the future would be: (Not for me personal, but for everyone in the project) - Being able to attend more events and present ourselves - Being able to have more face to face meetings when needed - But also investing in a conferencing infrastructure to save money and carbon footprint, as well as enable people living far away to join This is only my idea, and I'm sure not everyone is happy with it. :-) However: The marketing project, IIRC, will most likely have the responsibility of a much larger travelling budget this year, assigned by the council, so let's spend it wisely. I still have the feeling that by being able to attend more things in person (again, not myself, but many people inside the project), we can gain a lot of attention. Look how often other projects meet -- it doesn't do them any bad, but the opposite. It might not work for us, but I have this feeling, and I guess it is worth a try. Ok, so much for today. :-) I'd love to keep up this discussion and also talk about it at our planned phone conference. Then there is the question of price, how expensive is expensive, for people be very concern with price on paying a company to provide infrastructure, we are very loose to grant travel budgets. example, nothing wrong on having 2 600 euros meeting a year but we would think that is too expensive to pay 12000 euros to a company for virtual services. At the moment I think it would, yes. 12.000 € a year is 1.000 € per month. Looking at how many conferences we are likely to have at the moment, this would mean several hundred € per conference. Way too much, IMHO. I asked various times who would be generally
[marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg]
I rather move the conversation to a new thread, about the discussion on face to face vs virtual meetings. Is easy to say that face to face is better, is harder to justify who should be involved into this face to face and why. Does his tittle makes him eligible just because he is the lead, or his nearbyness is the main factor that can make him viable for him even if he/she is not the best person just because face to face is better. I agree that face to face is better, but only if everyone that want to participate is available to assist. Yes we do have an OOoCon, but it also have those same issues. I WOULDNT say that the marketing meeting failed to provide a consensus even thought it was face to face. But I would say that time was also an issue and with many activities in such few days, face to face proved to not have much effect on reaching a final decision on a new marketing plan for 2010. The way I see, the only way to provide a good overview is to have most parties involved and carry on the conversation. Like Lars said, there is IRC, Skype and also VoIP. However there is also other services that many people use like TinyChat, Stickam, UStream etc. Hanging with Web 2.0 people, they have proved to be quicker to adopt new technology while I still struggle to have a skype conference with many people in Sun/OOo because they are not used to the technology. Then there is the question of price, how expensive is expensive, for people be very concern with price on paying a company to provide infrastructure, we are very loose to grant travel budgets. example, nothing wrong on having 2 600 euros meeting a year but we would think that is too expensive to pay 12000 euros to a company for virtual services. So I want to define how expensive is expensive. Then there is the issue on openess, we are a free software project and we should support free and open source options. SIP is by far more open than the skype protocol, but skype make it so easy to use that is also prefered than the free alternative. I dont think this is a good way of looking at things. We should discuss this further. The other issue is that we see no problem wasting money on transportation companies, but how about spending money on our own OOo people. I would like to discuss paying for a ticket vs buying a SIP phone, Webcam, USB professional microphone for a project lead or Marcon. I much rather spend money in Sophie, Eric, or John than in Luftansa or ibis... but that's just me. -- Alexandro Colorado OpenOffice.org Espantilde;ol IM: j...@jabber.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org
Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg]
I think you raise excellent points, Alexandro and I understand Florian's perspective, too. And while it seems to me that both of you (and all of us) are seeking to serve the same objective (ie: wise stewardship of community resources) in terms of 'how expensive is expensive' I humbly suggest that in any collaborative endeavor in order for an informed decison to be made about the 'wise' allocation of funding or other resource, there must first be a 'marketing plan' so it can be determined whether the (proposed) project actually serves the marketing objectives that we (the community) seek to achieve. That is, until we have ratified a marketing plan which clearly articulates our (current) objectives, it is impossible to make a rational/logical decision regarding the appropriateness of any (proposed) project funding budget. Only after clear marketing objectives are ratified can specific project costs (face-to-face conferences, exhibit booths, travel subsidies, promotional materials stipends, virtual networking, etc.) be honestly (and relatively easily) evaluated in proportion to the actual/potential 'return on investment' being made by the community in the interest of (effectively eficiently) 'getting the word out' about OOo. Anyway, just my 3cents smile. ~Christine - Original Message - From: Alexandro Colorado j...@openoffice.org To: dev dev@marketing.openoffice.org Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg] I rather move the conversation to a new thread, about the discussion on face to face vs virtual meetings. Is easy to say that face to face is better, is harder to justify who should be involved into this face to face and why. Does his tittle makes him eligible just because he is the lead, or his nearbyness is the main factor that can make him viable for him even if he/she is not the best person just because face to face is better. I agree that face to face is better, but only if everyone that want to participate is available to assist. Yes we do have an OOoCon, but it also have those same issues. I WOULDNT say that the marketing meeting failed to provide a consensus even thought it was face to face. But I would say that time was also an issue and with many activities in such few days, face to face proved to not have much effect on reaching a final decision on a new marketing plan for 2010. The way I see, the only way to provide a good overview is to have most parties involved and carry on the conversation. Like Lars said, there is IRC, Skype and also VoIP. However there is also other services that many people use like TinyChat, Stickam, UStream etc. Hanging with Web 2.0 people, they have proved to be quicker to adopt new technology while I still struggle to have a skype conference with many people in Sun/OOo because they are not used to the technology. Then there is the question of price, how expensive is expensive, for people be very concern with price on paying a company to provide infrastructure, we are very loose to grant travel budgets. example, nothing wrong on having 2 600 euros meeting a year but we would think that is too expensive to pay 12000 euros to a company for virtual services. So I want to define how expensive is expensive. Then there is the issue on openess, we are a free software project and we should support free and open source options. SIP is by far more open than the skype protocol, but skype make it so easy to use that is also prefered than the free alternative. I dont think this is a good way of looking at things. We should discuss this further. The other issue is that we see no problem wasting money on transportation companies, but how about spending money on our own OOo people. I would like to discuss paying for a ticket vs buying a SIP phone, Webcam, USB professional microphone for a project lead or Marcon. I much rather spend money in Sophie, Eric, or John than in Luftansa or ibis... but that's just me. -- Alexandro Colorado OpenOffice.org Espantilde;ol IM: j...@jabber.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org
Re: [marketing] Virtual conferencing system Was: [Funding request for a Visual Identity meeting in Hamburg]
Hi, will reply to the mail later on -- but just got an e-mail by the folks from talkyoo that conference rooms will cost from now on. We should be able to make the marketing phone conference nontheless, because they wrote as early adopter I will be able to use the service for free for some more weeks. After then, certain features and conferences with more than *six* people, will cost money. Should we go on with their service, it will cost us: - 14,95 € per month for a maximum of 10 participants with a maximum of 6 conferences per month - 24,95 € per month for a maximum of 25 participants with a maximum of 9 conferences per month - 49,95 € per month for a maximum of 50 participants with a maximum of 18 conferences per month Quite expensive, I think... I will ask the Mozilla folks on how they do their phone conferences, but: Has anyone a short-term alternative available that's cheaper? Setting up our own SIP service (should we decide to do so) will take some time. Shall I ask talkyoo whether they want to sponsor us with free conference services? Or shall we look for other services before deciding for one specific vendor? Any input welcome. :-) Thanks Florian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org
