On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 12:39 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: > 4.) Le Camp has luxury options (if you manage to share a car) > > Plenty of hotels are in 20km range of Le Camp, which amounts to 30min driving > at most. Considering most people (who dont work at home) have a longer daily > communte to work, I believe it's feasable for those who like a private room > to > take their share of effort and do car sharing with some likely minded > people.
In the (Swiss) company where I do a lot of work at present, a recent conversation showed that out of the (approximately 10) core people, most do not even have a driving licence. That may be unusual for the general population, but I don't think it's so unusual among technical people. (In Scotland overall, where I can find statistics easily, around a third of households have no access to a car, and far more among people who live in cities -- in Glasgow it seems to be about 60% of households that don't have access to a car.) As a non-driver I am uncomfortable with the idea of relying on another attendee for taxi service morning and evening for up to two weeks. The 40 minute bus ride to Yverdon would avoid that issue, but with walking time at each end that seems to mean an hour's commute twice a day, and missing the late-night discussions/hacking that are part of the point of having the conference in the first place. I stayed a relatively long way from the venue/hacklab in Oslo, but there when I missed the last tram it was still possible to walk back to my hostel. > > - We're close together. Searching for somebody? He's only 5 minutes away! That seems contradictory with the idea of some people staying half an hour away by car. It's quite likely that those people end up only attending for "core hours", and they will be unobtainable outside those. > IMO we have decided on Le Camp in announced DebConf team meetings three times > already, thus I'm reluctant to decide again, esp. as I cannot really see much > / any new input, just a loud minority. I am unhappy that new concerns are being raised at this stage. However, unfortunately I *did* see new information from these latest discussions. For example, I had no idea before that the majority of beds at Le Camp are the sleeping bag type. And I had simply assumed that there was a bathroom per one or two (larger) rooms, whereas I am now told that there are a few shared toilets and showers per building, and many showers only have a curtain for privacy during the shower itself, and no private changing area. And it was only drawn to my attention yesterday that the current budget does not include paying anyone to clean these limited numbers of toilets/showers at all during the period of DebConf/DebCamp, though it is hoped that some attendees might volunteer, or somehow be forced as a condition of coming. You refer to standards above this as "luxury", but it's really irrelevant whether or not these things are luxury in a global sense. The DebConf-provided accommodation of course needs to stay within our means, but this is the *first* DebConf plan where I don't see a good solution for the attendees who want something better. > Maybe this is more important than having a good DebConf. Maybe we need a bad > DebConf to learn. I agree that outcome may happen, but unfortunately in my mind the worry about a "bad DebConf" is the poor accommodation, lack of checklist- demanded things nearby, etc., and also this: making a decision now will not shut down the demoralising questions/circular discussion, we will still have a constant flow of potential attendees coming to ask the same questions in surprise until August next year. -- Moray _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
