[Linux-aus] LCA2014 update

[Russell Coker]

On Thu, 30 Aug 2012, Glen Turner <gdt at gdt.id.au> wrote:
> Linux Australia's non-LCA activities are funded from LCA profit. This in
> turn means that organising teams are have a limited ability to trade
> cost versus effort.

Why?  Something is better than nothing and even a conference that is likely to 
make very little profit is better for achieving the LA goals than having no 
conference.

> LCA is too small. It is currently too large for a university, whilst
> being too small to be economic for a convention centre. Equivalent
> conferences have bridged this gap, LCA has not. There seems to be a
> worry about having a "small" feel, but that's got a lot more to do with
> the approachability of a conference rather than its actual size.

Would we get the delegates if LCA was planned for 1000 people or more?

> Maybe FISL should be the future model, rather than being more like Linux
> Plumbers Conference.

Could you give a brief summary of the relevant differences?  I guess we could 
all read up on both those conferences, but even then it might not be clear 
which of the differences are applicable.

> Fix the sexism problem. Practically, because it is the prime risk to
> access to university venues; philosophically, because it isn't free
> software if using it carries a moral cost.

http://etbe.coker.com.au/2011/02/10/lca2011-harassment/

There are lots of issues in all of society related to mistreatment in regard 
to gender and sexuality.  There are real problems and in the above URL I 
refuted some of the bad ideas that were presented on this list and the LCA 
list after LCA2011.

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassment/Adoption

But I am not aware of any issue that impacts access to university venues or 
has other significant issues for LCA above other conferences.  LCA was one of 
the earlier conferences to adopt the Geek Feminism anti-harassment policy, in 
the above page LCA is at the top of a list which isn't in alphabetical order - 
so presumably it's in date order.

I'm all for making things better (and I can think of some improvements), but 
it seems to me that LCA is better than most conferences in this regard.

Good point about the moral cost, I'll have to borrow that one.

> I hardly bother with LUG mailing lists anymore because of the resulting
> angst. I certainly stay away from this sort of discussion, so I'll crawl
> back into my cave now.

Perhaps we should have a separate discussion about how to improve LUGs.  I get 
the impression that LUG attendance is falling for most Australian LUGs and 
that the only improvement is in the creation of regional LUGs.  I think that 
apart from the regional LUGs this is a serious problem.

As an aside I've seen the online video from LCA and other conferences cited as 
a reason for not attending LUG meetings.

-- 
My Main Blog         http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog    http://doc.coker.com.au/