Re: [LACTTE] Re: [Linux-aus] About a User Conference (was...)

[Michael Still <mikal@stillhq.com>]

Anthony Towns wrote:
> Michael Still wrote:
>
> > > Funding.
> > > --------
> > > 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 
> > > insurance.
>
> 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?

Mikal

--

Michael Still (mikal@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
conference. http://lca2005.linux.org.au