On 7 July 2015 at 15:22, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2015-07-07 15:15:35 +0800 (+0800), Tom Fifield wrote:
> [...]
>> There's one other subtly to throw in which is the fact that the paid
>> ticket price need not be static - instead "name your price".
> [...]
>
> This is sort of what DebConf does, e
On 2015-07-07 15:15:35 +0800 (+0800), Tom Fifield wrote:
[...]
> There's one other subtly to throw in which is the fact that the paid
> ticket price need not be static - instead "name your price".
[...]
This is sort of what DebConf does, except they provide some
suggested registration fees for non
Mark's faster than me as usual - I was going to suggest the same :)
There's one other subtly to throw in which is the fact that the paid
ticket price need not be static - instead "name your price".
To me, this is a great way to get some opportunistic income, without
affecting the accessibility.
The operator summit is about hearing from the operators and allowing them to
exchange information (solutions, observations, complaints...) and provide input
to the devs. I feel it is best to hear from as many operators as possible.
Therefore the size of the summit should not be limited. A venue
I've never worked with an organisation that would willingly pay for a
ticket if there were free ones on the table, the ones often included in
sponsorship deals are even used first.
Just the idea of splitting by those that 'can' expense it seems odd to me.
There must surely be some sort of other r
As a suggestion re free / paid registration: have tiered tickets, like the
Community Leadership Summit does.
Having a free ticket vs a paid ticket would not grant more or less
access or privileges at the event, but gives the opportunity for people
who can expense a ticket to do so.
--
Mark Atwo