On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 3:16 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org> wrote: >> On 02/09/2010 21:19, Noirin Shirley wrote: >>> >>> I'm interested, and haven't been before, for whatever that's worth :-) >> >> And as this years lead admin I believe you should get priority for one of >> the places.... > > And IMHO the co-admins (Ross and Luciano, right?) should get the next seats. > > I think Google prefers that we send only one non-us person there to > keep costs low? If that's correct that would be Luciano. If not, toss > a coin between you guys ;-) > <snip/>
I think thats correct, with some wiggle room. Seems the last from Carol on this was its OK in exceptional circumstances to send both non-US attendees (for some definition of exceptional to be clarified with her I suppose) and to use our discretion in the matter. More in soc mentors list archive. I agree that giving priority to org admins is a simple (and even intuitive) metric for choosing our attendees. Where org admins have attended before and/or would graciously consider making room for others (as both Ross and Luciano have in this thread), I think we should look to the wider mentor pool. Heres the net of what I'm saying. Assume same logistics of mentor summit for next 5 years for sake of illustration here. Then I think it makes more sense from an org perspective if the number of individuals we send over across those 5 years going forward tends towards 10, rather than tending towards 2. -Rahul
