On 1 Jul 2005, Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> wrote: > There are the different aspects of this issue, the first being the > holding of a "Linux Australia" conference, overseas, and, the second, > being the use of Linux Australia funds, to pay for committee members to > travel overseas, in relation to the conference being held overseas. As AJ noted, the efficiency of the ghosts meeting (and indeed of LCA as a whole) could be improved by planning & purchasing further in advance. Very well. LCA is the major income source for and public face of LA. Much of the discussion now is about what if anything LA should do beyond LCA. I think reasonable expenditure on LCA is therefore far easier to justify than any other expenditure. It is reasonable to ask if people travelling at LA's expense are doing enough work to justify the expense. Everyone who attended spent two full days in meetings, plus two days travelling (or more). Everyone who attended contributed actively to the preparation of lca06. The lca06 committee is rather better prepared than before the meeting, and conversely LA has increased confidence in the lca06 committee. I think a summary of the business was posted here previously. In a commercial setting, I'd think it reasonable to pay 6(?) employees to travel to NZ for two days as a major preparation for a $250k project. I'd want them to work hard but I think the LCA people did. Bear in mind that the attendees were volunteers and the cost of their lost work time may be comparable to the cost of the tickets. Many attendees took holidays in NZ at their own expense before or after the meeting. Most organizations allow a similar arrangement, particularly when those involved have already given their best over the past year. The cost is more than for sending people to Sydney, but that should have been considered when Dunedin was chosen. -- Martin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature