[Linux-aus] Should Linux Australia change its name

[Chris Neugebauer]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 23:13, David Newall <david at davidnewall.com> wrote:
>
> Would it be fair to say that our name hasn't damaged our ability to assist
> the Python community, but merely caused an additional task for the
> organisers?

Only if it didn't directly affect our ability to sign up sponsors, and
restrict the delegate pool that would otherwise be interested in the
conference.

And even if it *were* fair to say that, as an organiser, I'd much
rather have the time to chase more sponsors so that we can put on a
better conference.  The time spent explaining the role of LA to one
large, potential sponsor could have been used tracking down further
keynote speakers.

Our time is limited.  If an *avoidable* task has been created, it
directly affects our ability to serve the Python programming community
through running PyCon Australia.

> One other point: how is Python on Linux different to Python on other
> platforms?  Isn't it more similar than different, to the point that the
> underlying platform is almost irrelevant?  Doesn't angst at attending a
> Python conference sponsored by us indicate a hostility to Linux that exceeds
> devotion to the language?  Religious mania is core to our principles and
> history, and frankly, won't be mislead by a change of name.  If they hate
> Linux they'll hate it just as much under a different name.

It's absolutely not about them hating Linux.

It's a more subtle issue.  People decide on what conferences they go
to based on limited funding.  There are three other PyCons in the
Asia-Pacific region that they could chose to go to.

If people don't do their work in Python on Linux (yes, there can be
differences between python on specific). The thought process is thus:
"Oh, it's a Python on Linux conference.  I do my work on $_OS, so this
conference won't be relevant to me.  I'll go elsewhere.".  Thus we
lose delegates that we wouldn't have otherwise lost, and that we
*shouldn't* have lost, because the conference is just as relevant to
them.

To further discount the issue you raise: the sorts of delegates that
we're losing from this process are people we *want* at the conference.
 They're people who *would* take part in LA events if they went to
*just one*.  These are the sorts of people we can attract.

--Chris

-- 
--Christopher Neugebauer

Jabber: chrisjrn at gmail.com -- IRC: chrisjrn on irc.freenode.net --
AIM: chrisjrn157 -- MSN: chris at neugebauer.id.au -- WWW:
http://chris.neugebauer.id.au -- Twitter/Identi.ca: @chrisjrn