Summits, Conferences and Meetups workgroup - 2020-01-17

  1. daniel has joined

  2. daniel has left

  3. daniel has joined

  4. daniel has left

  5. daniel has joined

  6. daniel has left

  7. daniel has joined

  8. mrheritage has left

  9. daniel has left

  10. daniel has joined

  11. daniel has left

  12. daniel has joined

  13. daniel has left

  14. daniel has joined

  15. daniel has left

  16. daniel has joined

  17. daniel has left

  18. daniel has joined

  19. daniel has left

  20. daniel has joined

  21. daniel has left

  22. daniel has joined

  23. mrheritage has joined

  24. daniel has left

  25. mrheritage has left

  26. daniel has joined

  27. mrheritage has joined

  28. daniel has left

  29. daniel has joined

  30. daniel has left

  31. daniel has joined

  32. Guus

    We should arrange for someone to act as a master of ceremony for the summit. Traditionally, this has been Kev, but he's not attending this year. Suggestions?

  33. MattJ

    Not me?

  34. Guus

    I've received menus from the restaurant. I'll ask you to help me with translations later (today is crazy)

  35. Guus

    Unless someone has strong reservations, I'll try and find someone for the MC role.

  36. pep.

    I can act as a fallback of a fallback of a fallback [of a..] if necessary, but not me

  37. pep.

    Guus, we should look into sorting how expenses also? Those we know we're going to have to pay already?

  38. pep.

    Is the number of participants known already?

  39. pep. goes on the wiki page

  40. Guus

    We have little expenses, typically.

  41. pep.

    Cisco food?

  42. pep.

    teh dinner food?

  43. Guus

    Dinner is covered by a sponsor Taxis, I'll front and reimburse from the XSF The lunches are undecided for.

  44. Guus

    I'm not htinking we even need a van this year (but if so: that has also always been reimbursed by the XSF)

  45. Guus

    I can't think of other costs (maybe swag?) from the top of my head.

  46. pep.

    Why are lunches undecided? If we know how many are coming. I honestly don't want to go through that awkward moment again

  47. Guus

    I'm with you on that.

  48. pep.

    (If there's a way to avoid it)

  49. Guus

    So, we could put out a call for a sponsor now, or we could ask Board to reimburse it.

  50. pep.

    Does the XSF not have money? Can we not use that? Do we need a sponsor specifically to sponsor Summit food?

  51. pep.

    Any idea about how much that is?

  52. pep.

    Ah, by Board you meant the XSF?

  53. Guus

    XSF probably has the money. I can look up what the costs were last few years. My issue is that up until now, XSF has _not_ done this. As it's such an obvious thing to do in my book, I'm guessing there's a reason for that.

  54. pep.

    I'm also curious about this

  55. Guus

    Yes, if we want XSF to cover lunches, which would be significantly different from before, I think we should explicitly ask XSF Board to green-light that.

  56. pep.

    Sure yes

  57. pep.

    Let's put that on board agenda? It'd be great if you can dig up numbers

  58. pep.

    We still don't have access to finances publicly :x

  59. pep.

    (I know that's going to happen)

  60. daniel

    well the XSF has paid for dinner up until two years ago, no? the fact that we are now not doing this anymore should free up some resources

  61. daniel

    and two cisco lunches should be less than one dinner

  62. daniel


  63. Guus

    last years taxis were just under 400 (but I think you paid one of them on top of that, Daniel?). One day of lunch was 270.

  64. pep.

    Meh, we can really pay two day lunches.. We got 500 per mentor from GSoC that hasn't been redistributed? (150 going to each student?) so..

  65. Guus

    I have no issue with the XSF paying for lunch. I'm all for trying to get that in motion.

  66. pep.

    I can help if necessary

  67. Guus

    I don't think it's wise to offset things like that.

  68. Guus

    the tit-for-tat thinking makes things more complex than needed. If XSF can pay for this, and we want it to, it should. No need to offset it against anythnig else.

  69. pep.


  70. Guus

    ralphm as you've been a key player in getting this organized every year, I'd like your input.

  71. pep.

    Otherwise what's the point of getting sponsors up on the website if we still need to ask when we need anything :x

  72. Guus

    I don't think we _need_ to ask, but that we _choose_ to ask. I'm _thinking_ that this stems from a time where it was only natural that a sponsor that was attending was picking up the bill, and that people got used to that happening. You and me are quite new, and did not have that experience, which makes the whole "hey, no-one stepped up this year yet" talk more awkward to us than to some of the people that have been around longer

  73. daniel

    also 2/3 of the sponsors aren’t attending the summit

  74. Guus

    no-one from either Tigase or ProcessOne?

  75. daniel

    tigase does. but processone hasn’t been attending the summits for a couple of years

  76. daniel

    and i don’t know who that hosting company is

  77. Guus

    TIL that Holger is not employed by P1 then.

  78. pep.

    yeah he isn't

  79. Guus

    that hosting company does our hosting. I believe that relation was established back when the majority of the XSF members were on the other side of the ocean.

  80. Guus

    But, yeah - lunches on XSF not a problem for me

  81. Guus

    but lets run it by Board.

  82. Guus

    As for an MC - I'd like to consider Dave. He has an excellent command of the English language, has a lot of history with the XSF, has been elected in various positions within the XSF for a number of times, and has some experience running meetings.

  83. Guus

    I probed his interest earlier. He mentioned that he was interested, but was of the impression that the position he took in the recent discussion (around Travis' PR) would not make it useful for him to do it. He believes that it would not sit well with some members.

  84. daniel

    i actually don’t think an MC needs to have 'a history with the XSF' or have been eleected for various postions; if anything, to me that is a slight minus and something that has always bothered me a little bit about Kev (despite him doing an excelent) job; that being said "good language skills" and experience running meetings are the qualifications that i'd be looking for; and think Dave would be good at

  85. Guus

    daniel You might be right in that having history isn't a requirement for hosting a meeting at all.

  86. Guus

    In any case, Dave told me he'd be willing to, but only if explicitly voted in by board and no member expressing what would be a veto.

  87. Guus

    I, for one, think that if taking a position in an argument disqualifies one for this, we'd quickly run out of options.

  88. Guus

    In any case, Dave told me he'd be willing to, but only if we couldn't find anyone else, he was explicitly voted in by board and no member expressing what would be a veto.

  89. Guus

    (forgot about one of his conditions, corrected my earlier message)

  90. pep.

    To be frank, with his position in the latest drama (voluntary or not), I'm not entirely thrilled. I also agree with what Daniel just said. That said, I do think he'd be a good fit for MC

  91. pep.

    hmm I just realized he isn't here. I'm happy for him to see this fwiw

  92. Guus

    I've told him I'd bring it up with SCAM. I'm assuming this room is logged publicly.

  93. Guus

    Dave would be my preferred option. If we want someone else, please find volunteers.

  94. daniel

    Yes I'm officially fine with Dave (if that didn't came across through my ramblings earlier)

  95. pep.

    Guus: right, I don't have any immediate candidate in mind, and I didn't mean to veto anyway. That particular sentence would have been better said to him directly even and I'll try to have a chat with him. That is something I wanted to note, but consider me +1.

  96. ralphm

    We've asked for sponsors for both Dinner and Lunch, for years, and failing that XSF would cover it.

  97. ralphm

    Various parties indicated that it was easier to participate in that kind of sponsorship than our normal program.

  98. ralphm

    Now would be a good time for it.

  99. ralphm

    As for running the summit, I don't think it needs to be very formal. Uf Dave is willing, yay. Otherwise I'll probably take it.

  100. Guus

    > Now would be a good time for it. For what exactly?

  101. daniel has left

  102. daniel has joined

  103. daniel has left

  104. daniel has joined

  105. mrheritage has left

  106. mrheritage has joined

  107. daniel has left

  108. daniel has joined

  109. daniel has left

  110. ralphm

    Asking sponsors

  111. daniel has joined

  112. daniel has left

  113. daniel has joined

  114. daniel has left

  115. daniel has joined

  116. daniel has left

  117. pep.

    I'm fine with not asking for this specifically. Maybe that means we need the work on our sponsoring policy if sponsors feel this kind of event is easier for them.

  118. daniel has joined

  119. daniel has left