[H-GEN] [Fwd: Re: [LACTTE] Humbug bid to host LCA 2009]

[Clinton Roy]

Howdies,

On 10/25/07, Russell Stuart <russell-humbug at stuart.id.au> wrote:

> Below is some queries from LA regarding our bid.  I have
> added my thoughts, prefixed with @>.  I would like to
> send a response to LA by the end of Monday.  Post your
> suggestions to this list.

I'm generally quite happy with your responses Russell.

> LA hat firmly on, HUMBUG hat discarded in a corner somewhere.

Do we have anything in our constitution about desecration of symbols?

> What are the possible variations there? Apart from January, we've had
> CALU in July 1999 (Melbourne), and LCA in early February 2002 (Brisbane)
> and April 2005 (Canberra). Are you expecting to vary it a week or two,
> or by months? When do you expect the decision on definite dates be made?
>
> @> The reason for the "leaning" qualifier was is can be very
> @> hot in Brisbane at that part of the year.  Ergo there was
> @> some discussion of having it when it was cooler, so the
> @> bid left the options open.  We have not progressed beyond
> @> that point, so there were no specific dates.  However, that
> @> said we are tightly constrained by the  academic schedule.
> @> The venue and colleges are only available to us during the
> @> longer academic breaks.  There are only three breaks long
> @> enough to qualify.  They are end of January, mid June and
> @> mid November.  Of those, mid June would be the favourite.

This response does not actually say when we'll make a determination.
Something definitive like `a vote at the next humbug meeting' would be
ideal, I think.

> > QUT has a large number of rooms available and should have no
> > trouble hosting a 1000 person conference with one exception,
> > the keynotes. The largest room holds 600. QUT has offered to
> > network several rooms with AV links, or alternatively we can
> > outsource to larger venues in walking distance across the
> > river.
>
> One of the goals for the Sydney '07 team was to maintain a feeling of
> "intimacy" in spite of the increase in attendees. How do you think having
> separate rooms, or using a separate venue for the keynotes, will affect
> the intimacy of the conference? Do you think intimacy is important, or are
> there other goals that you think are worth focussing on at its expense?
>
> @> The topic of splitting the keynotes over several rooms versus
> @> holding them under one roof came up over and over again in our
> @> discussions.  It is still not settled, which is why we mentioned
> @> the option of hiring another venue in the bid.  Its not the cost
> @> that put us off it - its the logistics.  There are no suitable
> @> venues in Brisbane city.  Some venues do advertise accommodating
> @> 1000 people - but its turns out that's standing only.  The
> @> venues in South Bank can hold several thousand, but are an
> @> uncomfortably long walk away.
> @>
> @> Another option is holding them outdoors in the adjacent botanic
> @> gardens, but that doesn't seem popular with anyone.  The
> @> remaining option canvased was changing the format of the
(double s in canvassed)

> @> keynotes.  Either abandon them completely, or hold several
> @> keynotes and rotate the speakers.  This is not as radical as
> @> it sounds.  There is one member of our committee who has
> @> organised several conferences with many thousands of
> @> attendees, and there comes a point where you have no choice.
> @> The consensus was that LCA isn't at that point yet.  Still,
> @> we are coming close.  I presume the reason Sydney didn't
> @> have a keynote on one day is venue availability.
> @>
> @> On another level, keynotes and intimacy don't mix too well.
> @> The idea of getting intimate with anything in a room of 900
> @> people sounds outlandish.  The keynote sessions perform two
> @> functions.  Firstly, they provide a venue for the conference
> @> organisers to speak to the herd and know they are being
> @> listened to.  This will still happen in the split rooms
> @> scenario.  For this function the keynote speech is just
> @> bait.  Door prizes have worked well as bait in the past, so
> @> a speech is not the only option.  Secondly, they provide a
> @> shared experience for the conference attendees.  I don't
> @> think they work too well in that role.  Social events, such
> @> as the penguin dinner and the Google party do a better job.
> @>
> @> Speaking of the penguin dinner, the one everybody in
> @> Brisbane remembers most fondly is the one held in, ahhhh,
> @> Brisbane.  It may be we are just parochial, but the style
> @> of that dinner was more formal that has recently been the
> @> case.  We had a a master of ceremonies, and relevant to
> @> your query we had a formal speech.  As mentioned in the
> @> bid we intend to change the format of the penguin dinner,
> @> and this will be the direction of the change.

Talking about the dinner is getting off topic from the question here.
Again, perhaps a definite decision date here would be good?

> > Including weekly public tickets that in the price that
> > allows attendees to explore Brisbane is one idea. You can
> > also expect the format of the Penguin Dinner to change. In
> > the choice of papers there will be a bias towards Humbugs
> > roots - home grown projects that tinker and play with open
> > source.
>
> One of HUMBUG's roots has been a focus more on Unix in general than
> Linux in particular; an aspect of which was reflected in the selection
> of the "Why BSD is better than Linux" talk at LCA 2002. Is there any
> expectation this will happen again? Is there any reason to think it
> would be a particularly good or bad thing if it did?
>
> @> The short answer is: we would love to see papers from other
> @> OS developers, and indeed mini-confs based around other
> @> open source OS's.  We have so much in common.  We use the
> @> same user land apps, same tool chains, enjoy arguing for
> @> hours over a single paragraph in a license, lead kernel
> @> developers display the same mailing list etiquette, and we
> @> all love the smell of bruised egos in the morning.  Indeed,
> @> when you use their rightful names, "GNU Linux" and "GNU
> @> BSD", I wonder why it hasn't happened more in the past.

I thought I'd made it pretty clear in the bid that this was going to
conference including everyone  in the unix ecology, apparently not
clear enough.

> >   Bid Budget
> >     http://www.stuart.id.au/lcawiki/Budget/Budget
>
> Please email the draft budget to committee at linux.org.au.
>
> >@ Done.
>
> If the draft budget has been prepared from entirely open information, is
> there any reason to restrict access to it? It may be a useful resource
> for future bidders, eg. If some of the information used to prepare it
> isn't public, please indicate which when forwarding it to the committee.
>
> @> Re: Is there any reason to restrict access to it?  No.
> @> As stated in the bid, the only reason access has been
> @> restricted is that has been the procedure up to now.
> @> When in Rome do as the Romans do and all that.
>
> How do you expect to handle the budget (what software, etc), and how do
> you expect to make that available to people other than the LCA treasurer?
> Other than the LCA treasurer, to whom would you plan on providing access
> (both within the LCA team, and outside of it)?
>
> @> Our belief is that an organisation such as LA whose
> @> bedrock is openness and sharing should be applying
> @> those same principles to financials.  Ie, release early
i.e.,

> @> and often.  That said, it ain't our money, so what we
> @> believe is beside the point.  The release of the LCA
> @> financials will continue on the same lines as it has up
> @> till now.  That is, they will be kept confidential.
> @> They will be released only to LA, who will do with them
> @> as they see fit.  We can hope you don't disappoint, but
> @> nothing more.
> @>
> @> Within the LCA team, all of the committee will have
> @> access to the budget, the actuals, and the individual
> @> transactions.  The idea is anybody from within the
> @> committee could perform their own audit.  The one
> @> exception to this will be donations and sponsorships.
> @> Only the total, and the names of the sponsors will
> @> made available.
> @>
> @> Regarding software - LA's choice.  Given the limited
> @> number of transactions (100's I'd guess), hand writing
> @> them in a ledger book would work.  If LA doesn't make a
> @> choice, then the transactions will be recorded in a
> @> LDAP sever and given to LA in ASN.1 format.

You're on crack with that last sentence, right?

> The lcawiki/Team page lists Raymond Smith as the only name for Treasurer
> -- however he's recently left for the US. Do you have an alternative
> treasurer in place, or expect that he will remain as treasurer despite
> his location?
>
> @> Raymond can't remain as treasurer.  The job requires chasing,
> @> signing and securing paper.  You have to be here to do that.
> @> No, we don't have an alternative in place.  It all happened
> @> after the work on the bid was substantially done.  I was
> @> delighted when Raymond nominated as he is obviously ideal
> @> for the job.  Perhaps that is why we got no other nominations.
> @> However, Humbug has no shortage of members who could fill
> @> the role - you for example.  Failing that I (Russell) will
> @> do it.  I had planned to take a heavy interest in that area
> @> anyway.
>
> Is this bid really just an elaborate plot to exact revenge on Mike
> Beattie?
>
> @> :).  I have fond memories of Dunedin.  If we can make the
> @> conference as pleasant for the attendees as Mike and his
> @> team did I will be very happy.
>
> Given the bid was Cc'ed to the HUMBUG general list, we presume you're
> happy for the bid to be presented to the linux-aus list and your Tasmanian
> rivals for comments and suggestions. Is that fair to say?
>
> @> Yes.
>
> >From the bid document, the only additional idea I saw over past
> conferences was a weekly public transport ticket? Were there any I missed,
> or are you keeping some secret, or are you planning on focussing on
> "doing the same thing, better" rather than adding new things, or is that
> something that you'll let evolve, should your bid succeed?
>
> @> Well, as I have said the dinner will change.  As far as
> @> innovative and new events go like Pia did with open day -
> @> probably not.  We are not as clever as Pia, I fear.  My
> @> personal goal is to make the conference more intimate,
> @> believe it or not.  More intimate as in encourage the
> @> attendees to interact, chat and share, preferably in ways
> @> that don't necessarily involve alcohol.  I have some
> @> ideas to make that happen, but they have to compete with
> @> all the other suggestions I get at each Humbug meeting.
> @> We will see how it pans out.  In the mean time every LCA
> @> must have is secrets, otherwise where is the excitement?

I'd be quite happy to say that our chief aim is to do the same things,
but better.  There's tonnes of things that our local environment can
bring the conference, a cruise on the river, a swim at southbank etc.
But i'd really like to try to put the conference in a grander
perspective, and get people to understand just how amazing OSS is in
historical context. I'm thinking of taking people through GOMA or BOM
to see creativity from different angles. But maybe I'm just rambling
now :)

Thanks Russell.

-- 
Clinton Roy
CSIRO - Robotics Platform Engineer
Autonomous Systems Lab

humbug.org.au  - Brisbane Unix Group
azure.humbug.org.au/~croy/blog - Blog
flickr.com/photos/croy/ - Photos