Open Stack

Honestly I'm fine with the elected board helping to make this decision.
Folks that want to underwrite the event can submit a proposal to host,
board picks from the submissions? Having a wide vote on it seems overkill
to me.

Open call for submissions, board votes. Is that unreasonable?


- jlk

On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Tom Fifield <tom at openstack.org> wrote:

> OK, so I'm just going to throw this one out there to re-stoke the
> discussion ...
>
> Venue selection process.
>
> At the moment, there's a few of us who work hard in the shadows to make
> the best choice we can from a range of generous offers :)
>
> In our brave new world, I think this should be a bit more open, what do
> you think?
>
> What kind of structure do we need to make the best decision?
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Tom
>
>
> On 01/07/15 15:29, Tom Fifield wrote:
> > Team,
> >
> > It's great to see so much passion! :)
> >
> > Here's an attempt at a summary email. I'll wait until a later email to
> > wade into the discussion myself ;) Feel free to jump in on any point.
> >
> > =Things we tend to agree on=
> > "Spirit of the event"
> > * The response most people had in common was that they didn't want to
> > see vendor booths :) Several others noted the importance that the event
> > should remain accessible and ensure there were no barriers to
> > attendance, space for networking with others and sharing information
> > about deployments without fear of vendor harassment.
> >
> > Multiple Sponsors
> > * are OK, but they are more like underwriters who should be OK with only
> > modest acknowledgement (see previous: no booths). Preference for
> > operator sponsors. Several ways to recognise them possible.
> >
> > Current Schedule Format
> > * It appeared like the current format is working well in general, but
> > could do with minor tweaks.
> >
> >
> > =Things still under discussion=
> > Sell Tickets
> > * Many people agreed that some moderate form of ticketing could be OK,
> > but the question remains to what extent this should be priced ("low
> > fee"? $100-200? "cover costs"?). A strong counterpoint was that paid
> > ticketing makes it less accessible (see "spirit"), prevents some local
> > attendance, and is unfair to smaller operators, though others noted that
> > it may be the only practical way to raise funds in the future.
> >
> > Break into Regional Events
> > * A number of viewpoints, ranging from "multiple regional events" to
> > "one event only [maybe with a travel fund]" to "one event that moves
> > around [maybe even outside USA]" to "make it in the centre of USA for
> > easier travel on average".
> >
> >
> > Capping Numbers (inc. Limit Attendees per Company)
> > * A lot of disagreement here. Many argued that any kind of cap or
> > barrier to entry detracts from the accessibility of the event. Others
> > put forth that too few restrictions could dilute the ops-heavy attendee
> > base, and implied that large companies might send too many people.
> >
> >
> > Multiple Tracks
> > * To help deal with room size, we could split into multiple tracks. The
> > ideal number of tracks is not clear at this stage.
> >
> > Evening Event
> > * Several people said they found the PHL evening event uncomfortably
> > packed, and suggested cancelling it on this basis, or on the basis of
> > cost. Suggested alternate was posting a list of nearby venues.
> >
> > Lightening Talks
> > * Have lightening talks, perhaps by renaming "show and tell". More of
> > them? Arranged differently? Unclear.
> >
> > =Ideas=
> > * Video Recording - Might be worth a shot, starting small.
> > * Travel Fund, Scholarship Fund, Slush Fund
> > * Use Universities during the summer break for venues
> >
> > =Open Questions=
> > * How will the number of attendees grow?
> > * What are the costs involved in hosting one of these events?
> > * Stuff about the summit - probably need a different thread for this
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 30/06/15 12:33, Tom Fifield wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Right now, behind-the-scenes, we're working on getting a venue for next
> >> ops mid-cycle. It's taking a little longer than normal, but rest assured
> >> it is happening.
> >>
> >> Why is it so difficult? As you may have noticed, we're reaching the size
> >> of event where both physically and financially, only the largest
> >> organisations can host us.
> >>
> >> We thought we might get away with organising this one old-school with a
> >> single host and sponsor. Then, for the next, start a brainstorming
> >> discussion with you about how we scale these events into the future -
> >> since once we get up and beyond a few hundred people, we're looking at
> >> having to hire a venue as well as make some changes to the format of the
> >> event.
> >>
> >> However, it seems that even this might be too late. We already had a
> >> company that proposed to host the meetup at a west coast US hotel
> >> instead of their place, and wanted to scope out other companies to
> >> sponsor food.
> >>
> >> This would be a change in the model, so let's commence the discussion of
> >> how we want to scale this event :)
> >>
> >> So far I've heard things like:
> >> * "my $CORPORATE_BENEFACTOR would be fine to share sponsorship with
> others"
> >> * "I really don't want to get to the point where we want booths at the
> >> ops meetup"
> >>
> >> Which are promising! It seems like we have a shared understanding of
> >> what to take this forward with.
> >>
> >> So, as the ops meetup grows - what would it look like for you?
> >>
> >> How do you think we can manage the venue selection and financial side of
> >> things? What about the session layout and the scheduling with the
> >> growing numbers of attendees?
> >>
> >> Current data can be found at
> >> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Operations/Meetups#Venue_Selection .
> >>
> >> I would also be interested in your thoughts about how these events have
> >> only been in a limited geographical area so far, and how we can address
> >> that issue.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >>
> >> Tom
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> >> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-operators mailing list
> > OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20150702/b0c1ef1f/attachment.html>