[Linux-aus] LCA2014 update
jamezpolley at gmail.com
Tue Aug 28 22:27:57 EST 2012
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Russell Coker <russell at coker.com.au>wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:
> > The only real pain with miniconfs is the additional venue cost (two
> > extra days of what are in general expensive venues these days), and
> > neither of your proposals addresses that.
> Why is that a "pain"?
I think Mikal is responding to earlier suggestions that ditching miniconfs
would reduce burden on the LCA organisers, by saying that the only burden
is the extra cost (ie, it doesn't actually significantly increase the
organiser's workload at all).
Do we have delegates complaining about the cost and asking for it to be
Not that I've seen; the problem today is that we don't have anyone who has
said they're willing to run 2014. Delegates won't be complaining about the
cost of a conference that doesn't run. The conversation here is about what
it would take to get the conf into a shape where teams weren't scared away
by what they're taking on; as Mikal has said, we don't seem to have any
problem attracting delegates - so long as someone steps up to run the
> Might it be worth doing a poll "would you prefer LCA to have no mini-confs
> the registration price was reduced by 20%"?
Take this a few steps further: let's do miniconfs on the Kickstarter model.
Remove the cost from the main conference rego, but give people the option
of pledging $X towards each proposed miniconf. Any miniconf that meets its
budget is scheduled, any miniconf that can't attract backing is not.
> My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/
> My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
> linux-aus mailing list
> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the linux-aus