Re: [Debconf-team] alternative ways of funding debconf
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) [060704 15:53]:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 06:57:41PM +0200, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> > if we limit local sponsorship to e.g. 200 people to keep costs
> > under control
>
> The first step shouldn't be "limiting" sponsorship, it should be asking
> attendees to cover their own costs if possible, with no obligation
> whatsoever. For corporate folks, this is a non-issue -- getting
> reimbursed for accommodation and food is what happens at conferences;
> and for people who are used to living in places at similar costs,
> it's not much of an issue either. So that means people like Bdale --
> who will presumably be speaking and has done a lot for Debian -- won't
> get any sponsorship; people like me might go for travel sponsorship,
> but not food or accommodation; while people from Europe might need food
> and accommodation sponsorship but not travel; and others might need
> everything sponsored.
making debconf free of charge for the debian workforce was a
concious design decison.
I am willing to experiment within limits, but i dont want to make
radical changes. I think at this point we are more in the
evolution then in the revolution phase, as people seem to be
rather content with debconf.
Note that i am all for improvement and dont think that we found
the optimum yet. When it is clear that we are stuck in a local
maximum with better results for inspiring debian people outside
our current scope i am willing to do more radical changes, but i
dont think we reached that point yet. One such optimization would
be that we give more power to the local team next year. (I think
both teams would be capable of carrying that responsibility well.)
But that does not mean that we should change all other parameters
at once, too. I am happy with debconf being different then
LinuxConf AU or Akacemy or Guardec, as long as we reach our goal
to set our community on fire.
> > we would in effect ask the remaining people to
> > carry costs of 7*19+250 = 383???
>
> $15 for breakfast and lunch, $25 for dinner with alcohol, $50 for a
> room for a night, comes to $90 per day, over a five day conference,
> that's $450 -- which for me, is the sort of money I expect to be spending
> anyway for a week long conference. For two weeks of camp and conference,
> it's $1260. People individually choosing to have less alcohol, eat more
> cheaply, or to share accommodation can make that cheaper, while still
> *helping* debconf by not being a drain on its resources.
>
> IMO, we do need to be careful to make sure sponsorship is about helping
> people who can't otherwise contribute be involved, and helping people
> who aren't in a position to ensure they'll be comfortable themselves
> (vegetarians making sure they have food, or people who don't speak the
> native language well trying to make sure they've got somewhere to stay),
> and not something that we end up taking for granted, and not appreciating.
we considered the "i want to pay for what i get" option a bit
when we discussed the money problem in Bosnia. I think letting
people pay what they want to pay would be a save step in the
direction you advertise. We can see how much money we get that
way. Actually in sarajevo we would have the possibility to hold
both options (dorm AND hotel) open without loosing either one and
could reconsider the money situation later when we come closer to
the conference. If people by then made serious "donations" we
could go for the hotel, otherwise we still have the dorm which we
can swing on our own (together with our sponsors).
Reply to: