Re: [Debconf-team] About microblogging
martin f krafft dijo [Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 08:50:45PM +1300]: > (...( > > I'd just prefer to not promise this to sponsors after DC16. > > I spoke to a few sponsors about DC15 twittering their engagements > for the first time and resonance was neutral-to-positive. Those > companies who themselves are on Twitter thought it was a nice idea, > and it's in fact quite common in the conference landscape. > > Why would we not promise this? It costs us fairly little and it does > bring visibility. We also promise an ad in a non-free, printed paper > that costs us fairly little. And none of this means that we endorse > the media, or that we don't also service users of the Free networks. Of course they won't object to us giving them more publicity. Why I don't like them? Because it leads to further merchandification to what should be official news channels, with interesting (read, mostly technical) insight. Turning a Debian account into a (yes, very low volume, but still) ad source does not feel in any way positive to me. Of course, sponsors will have their logos on our conferences' web pages, and of course, they can confirm our pages stay alive longer than most. That should be a much bigger carrot than a tweet or such. ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] About microblogging
also sprach Gunnar Wolf [2015-11-18 16:07 +1300]: > Why I don't like them? Because it leads to further > merchandification to what should be official news channels, with > interesting (read, mostly technical) insight. Turning a Debian > account into a (yes, very low volume, but still) ad source does > not feel in any way positive to me. I understand that sentiment and you have a good point. At the same time, however, I don't think we should just file "merchandification" as flat-out negative. Our sponsors are giving us money and we can now either say that this is payment for the great OS we made for them, or an investment into our future. We thank them for their support, and I think that's quite a different message than a "commercial ad" would send. But hey, if there's resistance, no gain in pushing for it. It was an experiment and we should rather use our time finding and trying the next experiment. -- .''`. martin f. krafft @martinkrafft : :' : DebConf orga team `. `'` `- DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16 DebConf17 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17 digital_signature_gpg.asc Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current) ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Formal meeting: Wednesday 18:30 UTC: Delegation for DebConf
also sprach Bernelle Verster [2015-11-16 00:56 +1300]: > My personal opinion is also, that these three proposals are pretty > much the same, and the only thing stopping them from converging is > ego. The reason I support the no-delegation (which I don't see as equal to the other proposals) is not ego. I do not take credit for this proposal. I merely consider it better suited for the nature of dc-orga in the light of our experiences, it's much leaner, and comes without any downsides over the other two approaches. Conversely, a well-made delegation also won't hurt, it's just going to take more time to get there, and adds an additional entity without obvious benefits, and comes with a bit of inertia. If the team wants to go this way (again), my "ego" won't stand in the way. More important than the question of whether we need delegates or not is IMHO the bid decision and decision arbitration. I'd like to think that the proposed "annually elected per-conference bid decision committee acting as quasi-ctte" is better aligned in terms of motivations/interests than fixed delegates arbitrating when they see fit, and I hope we can kick off the election process for this soon. The bid submission deadline is closer than we think and it's about time we get in touch with the potentially bid teams. -- .''`. martin f. krafft @martinkrafft : :' : DebConf orga team `. `'` `- DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16 DebConf17 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17 digital_signature_gpg.asc Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current) ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Formal meeting: Wednesday 18:30 UTC: Delegation for DebConf
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 07:21:58PM +1300, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Bernelle Verster [2015-11-16 00:56 +1300]: > > My personal opinion is also, that these three proposals are pretty > > much the same, and the only thing stopping them from converging is > > ego. And, the rest of the quote for context: > It goes without saying that I find this whole thing exhausting, and I > couldn't care how we solve this either way, as long as it goes away. > Hopefully, by the end of the meeting on Wednesday, there is a plan to > achieve this. My personal opinion is also, that these three proposals > are pretty much the same, and the only thing stopping them from > converging is ego. So swallow the ego - ALL of you, grow your > big-person panties, find a way to make all three proposals fit into > one, and by no later than Wednesday evening. And if I see one snarky > reply going on the defensive I'm sending this whole thread to spam and > you'll have to make do without me. I don't have time for this childish > shit. You are walking into the middle of a debate that has been raging for years. While it seems exhausting (and it is, there's a reason I've been silent through DC15 and up until now), this is how Debian works. For frustrations, for bad, and for good - we debate. Sometimes we fight. But, we don't just hurry with *any* decisions because it needs to be what's good for the community, what's good for the OS, and what's good for the *future*. If this is offending your time commitments, then I fear you haven't really evaluated Debian, or DebConf, before you volunteered to lead the charge to host a conference. The unfortunate news I have for you is if you don't have time for *this*, just wait until the final countdown to DC16. Now, for a dose of realism: what's likely to happen at the meeting tomorrow is that there will be further discussion, then there *MIGHT* be a consensus for a proposal to be taken to the DPL or Debian project at large for how to handle the situation. It may have to be referred to the mailing list for further discussion (because sometimes people who are scattered around the world can't make online meetings at certain times on certain days for various reasons), and then eventually either through GR or DPL delegation, we'll need to find a solution to the conference organization leadership vortex that has developed. Regardless, this is *not* a decision that will be made tomorrow. A general idea of what people who are currently working on the current conference might arise, but that doesn't necessarily dictate the groundwork for the future, which is a little more important than appeasing your desire to not have to spamify this entire thread. I'm actually pretty offended by the "big-person panties" comment. I find it rude and unecessary and not at all an effective way to bring volunteers together. I would advise if you want people, especially Debian Developers and Maintainers, to support you and work with you, that you consider being a little more constructive in your requests for constructive dialogue. Since I'm pretty sure you know very little about me, let me assure you that this was all said with no snark. -- -- Patty Langasek harmo...@dodds.net | harmo...@debian.org -- At times, you may end up far away from home; you may not be sure of where you belong anymore. But home is always there... because home is not a place. It's wherever your passion takes you. --- J. Michael Straczynski ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] Tammy Manning sent you "Flyeamendedr 2 MORE OPTIONS 17 NOv.pdf"
Tammy shared a file with you on Dropbox "Hi Everyone I have amended the artwork the copy and everything was way to big and added 2 more options for the back, I must say I think the last page is working well now." View file "Flyeamendedr 2 MORE OPTIONS 17 NOv.pdf"[1] [1]: https://www.dropbox.com/l/s/aZ6M2Ott3eegOo6SwlGzUm?text=1___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] Tammy Manning sent you "Flyer Option1 front and back.pdf"
Tammy shared a file with you on Dropbox "Please see Flyer Option 1 Front with 2 backs, not overly happy with the design so will try a second Option tonight. Flow is all wrong and looking messy. But see what you all think. Regards Tammy" View file "Flyer Option1 front and back.pdf"[1] [1]: https://www.dropbox.com/l/s/pE3MRDjJCtUIInwyazgfvj?text=1___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] Tammy Manning sent you "Flyeamendedr.pdf"
Tammy shared a file with you on Dropbox View file "Flyeamendedr.pdf"[1] [1]: https://www.dropbox.com/l/s/6DWhyjLmF91YHBONydIFBf?text=1___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Protecting Debian from DebConf issues? (was: Collaboratively drafting the next DebConf) delegation
On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 09:09:57AM +1300, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Steve Langasek [2015-11-08 05:09 +1300]: > > The proper role of the chairs should be to ensure the functioning > > of the DebConf team and the success of the conference. > … neither of which can be "ensured". Technically true. What the delegates are actually there to ensure is that Debian resources are not misused to put on a *failed* conference - by facilitating a successful conference if possible, and to pull Debian's support for the conference if not. > We've had problems in the past and we'll have problems in the > future, which no delegation can prevent or mitigate. Categorically false. > > Without either a direct sign-off by the DPL or a delegation from > > the DPL, no one involved in DebConf organization has any authority > > to use Debian's name to solicit sponsorship. > Sometimes it feels to me that the danger of a bad DebConf reflecting > negatively on Debian is one of the two pivotal points in this entire > debate. It's not just about a bad DebConf "reflecting negatively" on Debian. It's also about DebConf being the single largest expenditure of project funds each year (if you are calling it the annual Debian Conference and soliciting funds, those are all *Debian's* funds being spent to put on the conference), and the fact that whoever is planning the spending of those funds needs to be directly accountable to the project. > Nobody has a problem with people organising conferences to further > Debian in any way (cf. MiniDebconfs and other events). In fact, we > count on it being done by volunteers of their own initiative, or > else we'd need a bureau and staff. > As long as such events don't interfere with the Debian project (e.g. > concerted fundraising efforts, which don't yet exist) or tarnish the > brand(s), there is no reason why people shouldn't be soliciting > funds towards the organisation of such events. If you want to solicit sponsorship for organizing a mini conference to work on Debian stuff, that's ok, as long as you're not misrepresenting it as being on behalf of the Debian project. If you want to solicit sponsorship for a conference and call it the annual Debian Conference, but the Debian Project does not have control over how that money is spent, that's *fraud* - even if the conference is not a "failure". > We already have a team/delegation in charge of use of the Debian > brand, especially in situations where money is involved. It could > already be considered part of the trademark team delegation to > oversee DebConf fundraising and ensure that we don't make promises > we can't keep, and that budgeting/treasury stays true to DebConf > values.¹ A parallel delegation will only bring additional work, > confusion and friction. I don't have a strong opinion on the structuring of the delegation, but I don't think this makes sense as part of the trademark team which is charged with policing how third-party entities use the Debian trademarks. The overlap between those duties, and the responsibilities involved in providing oversight for DebConf, is negligible. > Within the constraints overseen by those in charge of the Debian > brand, we should let the DebConf team work any way they want, and be > open to the idea that e.g. a South-African-led team will approach > orga differently than a team led by Germans. There's great potential > for cultural exchange here! No. Debian's single largest annual line item expenditure is not an excuse for cross-pollination of organization models. This constant organizational revolution is a huge waste of energy, and one of the big reasons the DebConf team has had such a hard time making improvements that require multi-year planning or work. It sets the stage for DebConf returning to the bad old days of rolling from crisis to crisis for 6 months of the year. > This might mean building these teams before we pick them, especially > if we want to keep up changing locations as we've been doing. But > let's not expect there to be teams around the world that are happy > to scout out venues and otherwise slot in at the bottom of a complex > hierarchy. That's not very motivating at all. "Being answerable to the delegates" does not imply "being at the bottom of a complex heirarchy". I had no problem working with the chairs for DC14. I think if you find having to answer to delegates demotivating, that says a lot more about you than it does about the appropriateness of a delegate structure. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/
