[Linux-aus] LCA bids -- wonderful presentation, but to what purpose?

[David Lloyd]

Andrew,

> Another thing that a pro-forma response might help to achieve would be a
> more timely delivery of the proposals, since they would take less work.
> On the other hand, if they would take less work to prepare is there the
> possibility that the groups putting the proposals in wouldn't be up for
> the required work when it comes time to actually run the conference?

Unless a profoma states "Please ensure your presentation is crap so that 
everyone may be judged equally" there's no reason why YOU CAN'T PRESENT 
IT IN A GOOD PACKAGE.

Unless the bidders CAN'T put in supporting material, there's no reason 
why the supporting material can't be swanky and smooth.

Maybe we could ask:

1. TECHNICAL SUBMISSION

  - pro forma
  - expected to be in certain format, grammatical and well-spelled

2. ARTISTIC / MARKETING SUBMISSION

  - please provide at least one example of a REAL promotional BLAH you'd 
provide; or
  - provide an artistic/marketing way why you should hold the conference

So:

1. We get the pro form technical submission

2. We get an idea of what artistic/presentational skills the bidders 
intend to use

Who knows if this is a good idea? It's probably NOT but I don't see why 
a pro forma bid needs to look crap. I don't see why a pro forma bid 
needs to stop cities/bidders from doing interesting marketing ploys to 
get the conference either.

I do think a guide as to what to address that is NOT the previous years' 
(plural year) bids would be  useful thing to have even if it were not 
pro-forma as such.

DSL