On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 02:06:28PM -0400, Richard Darst wrote: > - Edit the current reconfirmation email to sai > - We can't promise you sponsorship yet > - Please fill in travel -> debian work so that we can review stuff > - Reconfirm if you can, please fill in all your data anyway. > - You'll get another email before you have to reconfirm, saying if > you have sponsorship or not.
As I said on IRC today, I highly object to this. In terms of food and lodging sponsorship, we're only about $30-40k in the hole (yes this includes about $20k from Debian), with another $10-30k of potential sponsorship leads currently or soon being pursued and many more available. Including travel sponsorship, we're $50-60k in the hole, and including an optional small surplus, $55k-65k in the hole. In past years, with sufficient strenuous effort, we have been able to close or reduce many fundraising gaps, such that I think we can end up either with a surplus or a harmlessly small deficit. If we inject this much proposed uncertainty into the process at least regarding the expensive (accommodation) sponsorship component, on the unreasonably pessimistic assumption we will fail to make the numbers balance, then many people from poorer financial backgrounds will cancel their attendance, and won't be able to change their minds a second time if money materializes. This is highly unfair given that we promised to try our best to provide them with food and accommodation sponsorship and still have a good shot at doing so. My proposal is that today or tomorrow we email everyone their reconfirmation emails, saying that (for those who requested it timely) we can confirm that they will receive accommodation sponsorship if they reconfirm by june 10th and show up to the conference, and that we hope to be able to confirm food sponsorship soon but need to delay that pending additional fundraising. On IRC, Joerg Jaspert, Safir Secerovic, and Steve McIntyre all seemed to share my belief that we could raise sufficient funds over the upcoming two months with sufficient effort and that my proposal was reasonable. At least some of them also thought the proposed reductions in sponsorship guarantees were an overreaction. On the other side of the issue, Ana Guerrero, Richard Darst, Pablo Duboue, and Clint Adams were asserting that I was engaging in magical thinking and unreasonably faithful in things working out, and were highly concerned about what would happen in a worst-csae scenario. Moray Allan was in between the two groups in terms of fundraising confidence and emphasized that it was important to have enough people focused on that task instead of split between different duties. Apologies if I summarised anyone's view incorrectly. What does everyone else think? Please respond soon; I would like an email to go out before end of evening tomorrow (June 1st) NYC time, and am happy to put in effort toward that goal myself. - Jimmy Kaplowitz ji...@debconf.org _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
