Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Ouch ! : Re: OSGeo strategy and marketing : Call for ideas on osgeo activities

[Jody Garnett]

>
> The positives I see from the board identification of a need (for
> marketing), is that some really great marketing ideas are starting to flow
> onto our email lists, from the likes of Marc and others. We have some
> really experienced business development, marketing, and strategy people
> within the OSGeo community. You might want to check out some of the OSGeo
> Advocate profiles at https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Advocate
>

I have tended to view it a resource for outreach, as many listed here are
already active participants.

A few encouraging words from the board, offering to support personal
> initiatives to drive OSGeo marketing forward would likely be valuable at
> this point. (I've had a couple of private emails questioning whether
> marketing initiatives would be welcomed by the board.)
>

I would welcome marketing initiatives, when we outlined our goals (as you
see in the strategic planning document) many of the goals were with respect
to communication and marketing.

Beyond board support for personal initiatives I would like to see the
marketing committee equipped with a budget and mandate
--
Jody
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[OSGeo-Discuss] FOSS4GUK reduction in ticket prices

[Jo Cook]

Dear All

Due to some exceptional generosity from our sponsors, we're delighted to
say that we are reducing the ticket prices for FOSS4GUK 2016. Early bird
tickets are now £75 for the two days, plus there are now single day tickets
available. See http://uk.osgeo.org/foss4guk2016/ for further information.

If you have already purchased a ticket then we will be issuing refunds and
you will  be contacted shortly with details about this.

Many thanks, and we look forward to seeing you in Southampton in June!

All the best

Jo

-- 
*Jo Cook*
t:+44 7930 524 155/twitter:@archaeogeek

-- 
--
Astun Technology Ltd, The Coach House, 17 West Street, Epsom, Surrey, KT18 
7RL, UK 
t:+44 1372 744 009 w: astuntechnology.com twitter:@astuntech 


iShare - enterprise geographic intelligence platform 

GeoServer, PostGIS and QGIS training 

Helpdesk and customer portal 


Company registration no. 5410695. Registered in England and Wales. 
Registered office: 120 Manor Green Road, Epsom, Surrey, KT19 8LN VAT no. 
864201149.

--
Astun User Group - Conference 2016 
 
  
  
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Ouch ! : Re: OSGeo strategy and marketing : Call for ideas on osgeo activities

[Marc VLOEMANS]

Gents,

I bow out of this discussion, with still a semblance of grace.

Marc

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262
LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans


2016-04-28 15:21 GMT+02:00 Massimiliano Cannata <
massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch>:

> Cameron and all,
> Personally (and not speaking in the name of he board) i will be super
> happy and in super favor of having a marketing plan to be probably one part
> of theOSGeo  strategy.
>
> I just don't see that we should restart from scratch what has been done so
> far for this year.
>
> in my opinion, we should go on and make treasure of results (positive or
> negative) and improve the process for the future.
>
> Maxi
>
>
>
>
> Il 28/Apr/2016 14:31, "Cameron Shorter"  ha
> scritto:
>
>> Hi Maxi, board,
>>
>> It has been good of you to take the lead in putting together an OSGeo
>> Priorities survey.
>> Pushing an idea forward such as has been done has created a talking
>> point, leading to marketing conversations, although possibly not in the
>> direction originally planned, but constructive non-the-less.
>>
>> The positives I see from the board identification of a need (for
>> marketing), is that some really great marketing ideas are starting to flow
>> onto our email lists, from the likes of Marc and others. We have some
>> really experienced business development, marketing, and strategy people
>> within the OSGeo community. You might want to check out some of the OSGeo
>> Advocate profiles at https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Advocate
>>
>> The conversations are hopefully leading to a revitalization of the OSGeo
>> Marketing committee, which should in turn help free up the board to tackle
>> other initiatives. I suspect that you'd agree that to be able to tap into
>> this marketing expertise will be of value to the board?
>>
>> With regards to the specific conversation about delineating between
>> marketing and strategy, I've regularly seen marketing consultants being
>> included in company strategy planning sessions, and I see there being many
>> synergies between the two.
>>
>> A few encouraging words from the board, offering to support personal
>> initiatives to drive OSGeo marketing forward would likely be valuable at
>> this point. (I've had a couple of private emails questioning whether
>> marketing initiatives would be welcomed by the board.)
>>
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>
>> On 28/04/2016 9:23 pm, Marc Vloemans wrote:
>>
>> Ouch...once more picking up the towel from the ringI have to disagree
>> with the spin/suggestiveness/angle as below.it throws the whole
>> discussion back to its early beginnings ..it disregards what
>> individuals have contributed until now from their experience and insights
>> ..
>>  I realise that anything I write/offer further can be construed as too
>> critical, too negative, too this, that and other. However, we are IMHO
>> assembled at a too critical junction for OSGeo.
>>
>> I flatly refuse to go down a wrong path, only execute isolated subjective
>> tasks on behalf of whoever tells me to do so, while seeing the proverbial
>> ice-berg (irrelevance) on the radar (and the band keeps playing). That is
>> not in the spirit of OS communities. I am quite willing to work (and
>> starting to do so) on pressing present issues like: can we salvage our
>> presence at FOSS4GNA next week (no banners, CD's etc to be found), what
>> about actual funding requests But it would be nice if offers of help,
>> actual advice, contributions  etc are not so easily dismissed, disregarded
>> or kept for later usage.
>>
>> Actual terminology as "strategy is not a matter of marketing",  "I
>> suggest you to work..." , comparing us to governments and reminding  me
>> that 'the board has been elected', make me wonder if our community strategy
>> is still to be a bottom-up process and what type of signal this gives to
>> the members/volunteers. And if 'Father knows best what's good for me' 
>> Well, that only works if one holds power over me or if there is a
>> successful track record to show for. Right now it feels plain wrong to me.
>>
>> My contribution (and that of other commentators for who I have
>> professional respect for their particular expertise) should be seen as a
>> compliment and addition to what the Board has started.
>> If the questionnaire, Boards' strategic objectives and member'
>> participation/response all leave something to be desiredthen that is
>> totally OK with meas long as all involved learn from it, take
>> additional expertise on board, adapt, redesign and - anew - go for it.
>>
>> By the way;
>> If the Board requires more mandate than they feel they have right now, in
>> order to strategise properly (and not wait till 2017, while already our
>> Foss4gNA-presentation is in jeopardy and the all-important Bonn-OSGeo
>> strategy-presentation  coming up), then they 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Ouch ! : Re: OSGeo strategy and marketing : Call for ideas on osgeo activities

[Massimiliano Cannata]

Cameron and all,
Personally (and not speaking in the name of he board) i will be super happy
and in super favor of having a marketing plan to be probably one part of
theOSGeo  strategy.

I just don't see that we should restart from scratch what has been done so
far for this year.

in my opinion, we should go on and make treasure of results (positive or
negative) and improve the process for the future.

Maxi




Il 28/Apr/2016 14:31, "Cameron Shorter"  ha
scritto:

> Hi Maxi, board,
>
> It has been good of you to take the lead in putting together an OSGeo
> Priorities survey.
> Pushing an idea forward such as has been done has created a talking point,
> leading to marketing conversations, although possibly not in the direction
> originally planned, but constructive non-the-less.
>
> The positives I see from the board identification of a need (for
> marketing), is that some really great marketing ideas are starting to flow
> onto our email lists, from the likes of Marc and others. We have some
> really experienced business development, marketing, and strategy people
> within the OSGeo community. You might want to check out some of the OSGeo
> Advocate profiles at https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Advocate
>
> The conversations are hopefully leading to a revitalization of the OSGeo
> Marketing committee, which should in turn help free up the board to tackle
> other initiatives. I suspect that you'd agree that to be able to tap into
> this marketing expertise will be of value to the board?
>
> With regards to the specific conversation about delineating between
> marketing and strategy, I've regularly seen marketing consultants being
> included in company strategy planning sessions, and I see there being many
> synergies between the two.
>
> A few encouraging words from the board, offering to support personal
> initiatives to drive OSGeo marketing forward would likely be valuable at
> this point. (I've had a couple of private emails questioning whether
> marketing initiatives would be welcomed by the board.)
>
> Warm regards, Cameron
>
> On 28/04/2016 9:23 pm, Marc Vloemans wrote:
>
> Ouch...once more picking up the towel from the ringI have to disagree
> with the spin/suggestiveness/angle as below.it throws the whole
> discussion back to its early beginnings ..it disregards what
> individuals have contributed until now from their experience and insights
> ..
>  I realise that anything I write/offer further can be construed as too
> critical, too negative, too this, that and other. However, we are IMHO
> assembled at a too critical junction for OSGeo.
>
> I flatly refuse to go down a wrong path, only execute isolated subjective
> tasks on behalf of whoever tells me to do so, while seeing the proverbial
> ice-berg (irrelevance) on the radar (and the band keeps playing). That is
> not in the spirit of OS communities. I am quite willing to work (and
> starting to do so) on pressing present issues like: can we salvage our
> presence at FOSS4GNA next week (no banners, CD's etc to be found), what
> about actual funding requests But it would be nice if offers of help,
> actual advice, contributions  etc are not so easily dismissed, disregarded
> or kept for later usage.
>
> Actual terminology as "strategy is not a matter of marketing",  "I suggest
> you to work..." , comparing us to governments and reminding  me that 'the
> board has been elected', make me wonder if our community strategy is still
> to be a bottom-up process and what type of signal this gives to the
> members/volunteers. And if 'Father knows best what's good for me' 
> Well, that only works if one holds power over me or if there is a
> successful track record to show for. Right now it feels plain wrong to me.
>
> My contribution (and that of other commentators for who I have
> professional respect for their particular expertise) should be seen as a
> compliment and addition to what the Board has started.
> If the questionnaire, Boards' strategic objectives and member'
> participation/response all leave something to be desiredthen that is
> totally OK with meas long as all involved learn from it, take
> additional expertise on board, adapt, redesign and - anew - go for it.
>
> By the way;
> If the Board requires more mandate than they feel they have right now, in
> order to strategise properly (and not wait till 2017, while already our
> Foss4gNA-presentation is in jeopardy and the all-important Bonn-OSGeo
> strategy-presentation  coming up), then they have my backing!
>
>
>
> Vriendelijke groet,
> Marc Vloemans
>
>
> Op 28 apr. 2016 om 08:09 heeft Massimiliano Cannata <
> massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch> het
> volgende geschreven:
>
>
> > Dears
> > I personally don't believe that strategy is a matter of marketing.
> >
> > It is a matter of governance: identify what is useful and think of how
> implement it. All over the word governments do this.
> >
> > Marketing 

[OSGeo-Discuss] Technology Strategy for Intelligent Mobility

[Suchith Anand]

Dear colleague,

The Transport System Catapult has led the development of the Technology 
Strategy in order to champion the Intelligent Mobility vision for the benefit 
of all organisations interested in this fast growing area. The strategy was 
launched earlier this month in Birmingham . The strategy as well as the  
Intelligent Mobility online repository are at http://tsctechstrategy.co.uk

I would also recommend colleagues in all UK universities to engage more with 
the Catapults through secondment opportunities.  I found my secondment (which 
was focussed on "Open Technologies and Open data in ITS") with TSC really 
productive opportunity to work with amazing colleagues on innovative ideas for 
the future.

Best wishes,

Suchith






This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Ouch ! : Re: OSGeo strategy and marketing : Call for ideas on osgeo activities

[Cameron Shorter]

Hi Maxi, board,

It has been good of you to take the lead in putting together an OSGeo 
Priorities survey.
Pushing an idea forward such as has been done has created a talking 
point, leading to marketing conversations, although possibly not in the 
direction originally planned, but constructive non-the-less.


The positives I see from the board identification of a need (for 
marketing), is that some really great marketing ideas are starting to 
flow onto our email lists, from the likes of Marc and others. We have 
some really experienced business development, marketing, and strategy 
people within the OSGeo community. You might want to check out some of 
the OSGeo Advocate profiles at https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Advocate


The conversations are hopefully leading to a revitalization of the OSGeo 
Marketing committee, which should in turn help free up the board to 
tackle other initiatives. I suspect that you'd agree that to be able to 
tap into this marketing expertise will be of value to the board?


With regards to the specific conversation about delineating between 
marketing and strategy, I've regularly seen marketing consultants being 
included in company strategy planning sessions, and I see there being 
many synergies between the two.


A few encouraging words from the board, offering to support personal 
initiatives to drive OSGeo marketing forward would likely be valuable at 
this point. (I've had a couple of private emails questioning whether 
marketing initiatives would be welcomed by the board.)


Warm regards, Cameron

On 28/04/2016 9:23 pm, Marc Vloemans wrote:
Ouch...once more picking up the towel from the ringI have to 
disagree with the spin/suggestiveness/angle as below.it throws the 
whole discussion back to its early beginnings ..it disregards what 
individuals have contributed until now from their experience and 
insights ..
 I realise that anything I write/offer further can be construed as too 
critical, too negative, too this, that and other. However, we are IMHO 
assembled at a too critical junction for OSGeo.


I flatly refuse to go down a wrong path, only execute isolated 
subjective tasks on behalf of whoever tells me to do so, while seeing 
the proverbial ice-berg (irrelevance) on the radar (and the band keeps 
playing). That is not in the spirit of OS communities. I am quite 
willing to work (and starting to do so) on pressing present issues 
like: can we salvage our presence at FOSS4GNA next week (no banners, 
CD's etc to be found), what about actual funding requests But it 
would be nice if offers of help, actual advice, contributions  etc are 
not so easily dismissed, disregarded or kept for later usage.


Actual terminology as "strategy is not a matter of marketing",  "I 
suggest you to work..." , comparing us to governments and reminding 
 me that 'the board has been elected', make me wonder if our community 
strategy is still to be a bottom-up process and what type of signal 
this gives to the members/volunteers. And if 'Father knows best what's 
good for me'  Well, that only works if one holds power over me or 
if there is a successful track record to show for. Right now it feels 
plain wrong to me.


My contribution (and that of other commentators for who I have 
professional respect for their particular expertise) should be seen as 
a compliment and addition to what the Board has started.
If the questionnaire, Boards' strategic objectives and member' 
participation/response all leave something to be desiredthen that 
is totally OK with meas long as all involved learn from it, take 
additional expertise on board, adapt, redesign and - anew - go for it.


By the way;
If the Board requires more mandate than they feel they have right now, 
in order to strategise properly (and not wait till 2017, while already 
our Foss4gNA-presentation is in jeopardy and the all-important 
Bonn-OSGeo strategy-presentation  coming up), then they have my backing!




Vriendelijke groet,
Marc Vloemans


Op 28 apr. 2016 om 08:09 heeft Massimiliano Cannata 
> 
het volgende geschreven:




> Dears
> I personally don't believe that strategy is a matter of marketing.
>
> It is a matter of governance: identify what is useful and think of 
how implement it. All over the word governments do this.

>
> Marketing is about how sell / market your product to clients which 
is only one part of the strategy.

>
> That's why this elected board decided to take action. The process 
is certainly far from being optimal and the contribution of all the 
members of this community is desired. But i want to underline that 
this is at least a great starting point you should credit this board.

>
> The  call for ideas of action is beacause the board would like the 
understand what the community think is the more important and 
appropriate way of operate and spend money towards the selected 
objectives.

>
> Good 

[OSGeo-Discuss] Ouch ! : Re: OSGeo strategy and marketing : Call for ideas on osgeo activities

[Marc Vloemans]

Ouch...once more picking up the towel from the ringI have to disagree with 
the spin/suggestiveness/angle as below.it throws the whole discussion back 
to its early beginnings ..it disregards what individuals have contributed 
until now from their experience and insights ..
 I realise that anything I write/offer further can be construed as too 
critical, too negative, too this, that and other. However, we are IMHO 
assembled at a too critical junction for OSGeo.

I flatly refuse to go down a wrong path, only execute isolated subjective tasks 
on behalf of whoever tells me to do so, while seeing the proverbial ice-berg 
(irrelevance) on the radar (and the band keeps playing). That is not in the 
spirit of OS communities. I am quite willing to work (and starting to do so) on 
pressing present issues like: can we salvage our presence at FOSS4GNA next week 
(no banners, CD's etc to be found), what about actual funding requests But 
it would be nice if offers of help, actual advice, contributions  etc are not 
so easily dismissed, disregarded or kept for later usage.

Actual terminology as "strategy is not a matter of marketing",  "I suggest you 
to work..." , comparing us to governments and reminding  me that 'the board has 
been elected', make me wonder if our community strategy is still to be a 
bottom-up process and what type of signal this gives to the members/volunteers. 
And if 'Father knows best what's good for me'  Well, that only works if one 
holds power over me or if there is a successful track record to show for. Right 
now it feels plain wrong to me.

My contribution (and that of other commentators for who I have professional 
respect for their particular expertise) should be seen as a compliment and 
addition to what the Board has started.
If the questionnaire, Boards' strategic objectives and member' 
participation/response all leave something to be desiredthen that is 
totally OK with meas long as all involved learn from it, take additional 
expertise on board, adapt, redesign and - anew - go for it.

By the way;
If the Board requires more mandate than they feel they have right now, in order 
to strategise properly (and not wait till 2017, while already our 
Foss4gNA-presentation is in jeopardy and the all-important Bonn-OSGeo 
strategy-presentation  coming up), then they have my backing!



Vriendelijke groet,
Marc Vloemans


> Op 28 apr. 2016 om 08:09 heeft Massimiliano Cannata 
>  het volgende geschreven:
> 
> 
> > Dears
> > I personally don't believe that strategy is a matter of marketing.
> >
> > It is a matter of governance: identify what is useful and think of how 
> > implement it. All over the word governments do this.
> >
> > Marketing is about how sell / market your product to clients which is only 
> > one part of the strategy.
> >
> > That's why this elected board decided to take action. The process is 
> > certainly far from being optimal and the contribution of all the members of 
> > this community is desired. But i want to underline that this is at least a 
> > great starting point you should credit this board.
> >
> > The  call for ideas of action is beacause the board would like the 
> > understand what the community think is the more important and appropriate 
> > way of operate and spend money towards the selected objectives.
> >
> > Good or not, one page or five, perfectible or trashable this is a starting 
> > point.
> >
> > Questions could have been easier and we could have been more answers but we 
> > wanted well tought and feasible and verifiable actions, not just "Let's go 
> > to the moon" ideas.
> >
> > The next step of the board is the evaluate and prioritize answers and try 
> > to make them happen in 2016.
> >
> > I suggest you to work for the 2017 strategy supporting the board with 
> > market analysis and ideas so that wiser decision can be taken.
> >
> > Ant the end GIS is all about information to support decision making :-)
> >
> > Maxi
> >
> > Il 27/Apr/2016 16:20, "Marc Vloemans"  ha scritto:
> >>
> >> Steven, Gert Jan et al
> >>
> >> Please feel free to add, comment, fill in blanks and disagree with my 
> >> discussion piece in wiki Marketing Committee Discussion tab!
> >>
> >> My intention was to gather insights etc from others, while still framing 
> >> the discussions on our strategy, stakeholders,  questionnaire etc.
> >> As well as finding common semantics (eg Eco-system vs community, marketing 
> >> vs promotion).
> >>
> >> This way we can provide those less familiar with strategy-making processes 
> >> and marketing decisions/activities with some blue print and back ground. 
> >> (Like more tech-savvy colleagues explained software architecture to me in 
> >> the past ;-)
> >>
> >> Vriendelijke groet,
> >> Marc Vloemans
> >>
> >>
> >> > Op 27 apr. 2016 om 13:20 heeft Gert-Jan van der Weijden - Stichting 
> >> > OSGeo.nl  het volgende 

[OSGeo-Discuss] Fwd: Re: OSGeo strategy and marketing : Call for ideas on osgeo activities

[Massimiliano Cannata]

> Dears
> I personally don't believe that strategy is a matter of marketing.
>
> It is a matter of governance: identify what is useful and think of how
implement it. All over the word governments do this.
>
> Marketing is about how sell / market your product to clients which is
only one part of the strategy.
>
> That's why this elected board decided to take action. The process is
certainly far from being optimal and the contribution of all the members of
this community is desired. But i want to underline that this is at least a
great starting point you should credit this board.
>
> The  call for ideas of action is beacause the board would like the
understand what the community think is the more important and appropriate
way of operate and spend money towards the selected objectives.
>
> Good or not, one page or five, perfectible or trashable this is a
starting point.
>
> Questions could have been easier and we could have been more answers but
we wanted well tought and feasible and verifiable actions, not just "Let's
go to the moon" ideas.
>
> The next step of the board is the evaluate and prioritize answers and try
to make them happen in 2016.
>
> I suggest you to work for the 2017 strategy supporting the board with
market analysis and ideas so that wiser decision can be taken.
>
> Ant the end GIS is all about information to support decision making :-)
>
> Maxi
>
> Il 27/Apr/2016 16:20, "Marc Vloemans"  ha
scritto:
>>
>> Steven, Gert Jan et al
>>
>> Please feel free to add, comment, fill in blanks and disagree with my
discussion piece in wiki Marketing Committee Discussion tab!
>>
>> My intention was to gather insights etc from others, while still framing
the discussions on our strategy, stakeholders,  questionnaire etc.
>> As well as finding common semantics (eg Eco-system vs community,
marketing vs promotion).
>>
>> This way we can provide those less familiar with strategy-making
processes and marketing decisions/activities with some blue print and back
ground. (Like more tech-savvy colleagues explained software architecture to
me in the past ;-)
>>
>> Vriendelijke groet,
>> Marc Vloemans
>>
>>
>> > Op 27 apr. 2016 om 13:20 heeft Gert-Jan van der Weijden - Stichting
OSGeo.nl  het volgende geschreven:
>> >
>> > Steven, Maxi
>> >
>> > @Steven: Thanks for writing down for what is also my personal
experience.
>> > Even though I followed the process of setting up these strategic
outcomes from a rather nearby position,
>> > it's hard to feel engaged with the questionnaire.
>> >
>> > Let's try to analyse:
>> > The Board has as first steps (re-)written down a Vision, a Mission and
Core Values.
>> > The next two steps ("identification of ecosystems" and "identification
of 4 strategic objectives" have also been done by the Board solely).
>> >
>> > So now, in the 4th step, the Charter Members are asked for the first
time for their input.
>> > But in fact you have already lost me in defining the ecosystem: what's
the role of the 8 identified parties in this ecosystem? And how come
OSGeo.org itself not part of the ecosystem?
>> >
>> > And a few suggestions:
>> > 1. I think the Google Form would be easier to understand if it
contained one page for every of the 4 Strategic Objectives (so 5 pages in
total).
>> > 2. The last question ("ecosystems involved") has two components: the
"who is the main beneficiary", but also "who is the main actor".
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > regards,
>> >
>> > Gert-Jan
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
>> > Van: Discuss [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] Namens Steven
Feldman
>> > Verzonden: dinsdag 26 april 2016 21:35
>> > Aan: Marc Vloemans
>> > CC: discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> > Onderwerp: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Call for ideas on osgeo activities
>> >
>> > I just tried to complete the questionnaire. I found it very difficult
to understand. It seemed to be pushing me down a line of commenting on a
web site redesign
>> >
>> > It didn't give me enough context of why the strategic outcomes were
strategic and it didn't allow me to suggest any alternatives. The mandatory
questions force a choice from a predetermined list with no option to
suggest 'other' or 'none of the above'
>> >
>> > If we want to poll the Charter members, I think we need to provide
more explanation and perhaps consider a two stage process where the first
stage is more open ended and then at a late stage we ask for responses to
specific questions arising from the first stage
>> >
>> > Steven
>> >
>> >> On 26 Apr 2016, at 17:00, Marc Vloemans 
wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Alternatively
>> >>
>> >> What is going to happen to the outcome?
>> >> Some extra communication on that may enlist more entries.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Vriendelijke groet,
>> >> Marc Vloemans
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> Op 26 apr. 2016 om 00:41 heeft Dirk Frigne 
het volgende geschreven:
>> >>>
>> >>> We can try to discuss the first results on BOF on FOSS4G-NA, GWF