On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 18:31 +0200, Charles-H.Schulz wrote: > +1. We could also add as a perequisite: at least one computer with OOo > on it.
I'd say at least one, but probably at least one per person on a booth. A data projector is also handy for large screen demonstrations and if possible at least OOo on 2 platforms to demonstrate cross-platform capability. Windows and Linux are good because it is an area of competitive advantage. We need to identify and accentuate competitive advantage beyond price. Mind you I can think of times when a computer would not be essential - a book fayre for example. > Absolutely yes. In theory, the MarCons and generally the project leads > are qualified to be representatives. The other people speak only on > their own behalf. Isn't this how it is in any case? I just assumed it. Maybe it just needs reiterating from time to time to inform new members. I'd be reluctant to start new sets of bureaucratic procedures when resources are stretched. In fact instead of firefighting with existing under-funding perhaps a fund raising project would be better to make sure we can sustain a presence in specific events. Does Team OpenOffice publish accounts? If so where? It would be useful to see sources of donations and how these are spent to see if there are gaps and where these might be filled. Is there sufficient to fund half a dozen projects across the world or are we just participating in wishful thinking? > > Another question might be, what events we "officially" want > > to support, i.e. fund with money from Team OpenOffice.org, > > mention on the OpenOffice.org home page, etc. > > At some point the question would also boil down to this one: how much > money can we spend on the whole. > Then, I would classify events in the following way: <SNIP reasonable organisational procedures> > Third point. You saw the three different kinds of events I described > above. Let's put some priority on them, and let's add some flexibility > to these priorities. > category I: highest priority. Maximum efforts should be put there. > Except for OOoCON, the subsidiarity policy applies. > category II: average priority, depending on the context: are we having a > major release? is there something important we should tell the world > about? subsidiarity applies there too. > category III: education events are important, but we should make sure > that we wouldn't make a mistake in going there (sometimes computing is > just not the topic), aaargh! Education IT is *not* computing! :-) Education IT is using IT to support learning. Its not just about teaching people to be computer scientists. (what is the big fixation on coding ;-). The vast majority of people we spoke to at NEA were not conputer teachers. I can use OOo to teach every subject including things like citizenship, internationalism, social enterprise. Its a clear market advantage over the opposition if you understand the market. I'm supposed to be the education expert so I can inform people about the right shows to attend and the right approach to get educators on board. One key difference at NEA is that we were presenting OOo to new users who are extremely influential with other potential new users. I'd say that from a marketing point of view this was more important than preaching to the converted. > and there are tons of other events. If you pick one > that you feel could help boost OOo's popularity, go for it. Subsidiarity > also applies here. I agree with that entirely which is why I funded the presence at NEA. A cynic might say I was just doing it to further the INGOTs and to an extent that is right because the INGOTs were designed fundamentally as a killer application to further OOo through education. The opposition spends $400m a year on marketing. We can't match that so we need to do something different. To me it makes no difference if its an OOo booth or an INGOT booth (Ok, Louis, all mine will be INGOT booths from now on :-)) the intention is to provide a compelling reason to use OOo that the opposition can't match. If someone can think of an equivalent for lawyers, dentists, car mechanics or whatever, go for it. Successful entrepreneurs are more valuable than coders because successful entrepreneurs have the potential to keep many coders productive. Entrepreneurs started Sun. Sun bought the Star Office code base and released it as OOo, Sun pays for most of the coding effort - think about it. -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMSL --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
