Daniel Pocock dijo [Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 09:49:33PM +0000]: > Has there ever been any variation to the existing sponsorship model, for > example, having sponsors for particular tracks? > > E.g. if there is a free/open VoIP track next year, there are a few > commercial VoIP operators I could reach out to - such sponsors could be > asked to pay a premium for things like
I am *personally* not in favor of such a scheme. I think the "academic" part of the conference should be free of sponsorship bias. Chairing a track includes the ability to decide what talks are part of it, and can become a huge advertisement, commercial venue. I do not say I will utterly oppose the idea, but I'm very much more at ease without it, or if it can be _clearly_ still controlled by us, not by the sponsor. > a) having roll-up banners in a room dedicated to the VoIP for a day > > b) someone from one of these companies could introduce speakers while > wearing a corporate T-shirt This could be acceptable, yes. However, if I take talkmeistering and, for some sessions in a row, introduce speakers with a shirt given to me by $foo, I get the equivalent of what they got against a huge payment - So, would sponsors think it's worth it? Wouldn't they prefer to pay me a beer, give me a complimentary shirt, and ask me to talkmeister for the day? > c) if it could be made clear that the sponsor was not associated with > the speakers, the corporate logos could be overlaid onto the bottom of > the slides We should not impose design criteria to speakers. There are many things to discuss if this idea goes further. I do not like he idea, and we have managed to avoid that point so far. Yes, we need money. But we need to stay as independent as we have always been. _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
