[LACTTE] Re: [Linux-aus] About a User Conference (was...)
mikal at stillhq.com
Tue Mar 1 08:22:02 UTC 2005
Anthony Towns wrote:
> Michael Still wrote:
>>> I am requesting $xxx seed funding from Linux Australia, and the same
>>> amount from AUUG. The reasoning here is to spread the risk of the
>>> event, and maximise the benefits to the community and both groups.
> I'm somewhat worried that having three groups (you, LA, AUUG) trying to
> run a single conference isn't that great an idea. :-/ OCG 05, eg, has
> explicitly minimal involvement from LCA and LA, and what little
> involvement there was seems to have pretty quickly resulted in chaos...
Which is a fair enough comment. I do think that both organizations have
more to learn about cooperation here (I can think of examples of strife
caused by either side), but I think things are improving.
I guess what I'm really saying here is that I think cooperation is good,
and that should be encouraged. I am happy enough for the event to
operate as a sub committee of LA, but I do think it needs a "hands off"
style of management similar to LCA.
The point with wanting my involvement for two of the event is that I
think it takes a couple of years for an event to get enough of a "feel"
to be easy to hand off to other people.
>>> Chain of command.
>>> I would report to both Linux Australia and AUUG, but would have sole
>>> delegated control of the event. Subsequent events would be negotiated
>>> between myself, Linux Australia and AUUG if this event is a success.
>>> Liability cover would be arranged through Linux Australia's event
> The way of doing it under the LA banner would be to act as a
> subcommittee (of one person, possibly) of LA, acting in LA's name and in
> accord with any directions that might come from the LA committee. That's
> officially the way LCA works -- the idea is that the LA ctte shouldn't
> be giving m/any directions because the subctte knows what it's doing.
> Having a joint ctte works by having representatives appointed by each
> organisation, so you'd have a couple of people from AUUG and a couple of
> people from LA, with LA/AUUG being able to direct how they vote on any
> particular issue.
I hadn't thought of that.
> Having just one person on the ctte, having to answer to two different
> groups on how you spend money doesn't seem like a great idea. We could
> just run it as a grant -- ie, you ask for money up front, then run it
> yourself -- but there'll be continuing costs that you probably can't
> estimate well enough up front which probably makes that impossible.
Ok. I like the tweak. We could do something like have a committee of x
people from LA, x people from AUUG, and me. Would that handle your concerns?
Michael Still (mikal at stillhq.com) | "The geek shall inherit
http://www.stillhq.com | the earth"
UTC + 11 | -- The Simpsons
Linux.conf.au 2005 -- Quite like an excellent Linux and Open Source
More information about the linux-aus