Re: [Debconf-team] DC13 Venue constraints
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:10:31PM +0200, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Thanks to Richard for the detailed breakdown of attendee statistics.
>
> Richard Darst <rkd@zgib.net> writes:
>
> > I remember for DC10, at first some localteam people wanted to reserve
> > 400 rooms because it would be huge and DC7 had 400 people. But I
> > looked at the detailed breakdown and it wasn't so big actually, even
> > though 391 people had "arrived" according to penta, the day with the
> > most people (according to penta) had only around 250 people. (I
> > think) I eventually convinced people to reserve only 300, and we still
> > had less than 200 used any given day.
> >
> > I just went and found that old script (I would have had it in my
> > standard dumps, but the God table I join with only exists for the
> > current debconf so I didn't extend to old years).
> >
> > Here's the data:
> > http://rkd.zgib.net/http/debconf/historical-room-statistics.txt
> >
> > for every debconf, it lists number of people requesting accom, and
> > total number of people in parentheses, per day. You can compare to
> > total attendees at the top.
>
> do I understand this correct, that the number is paranthesis are all the
> participants, including those who arranged their own accomodation?
Exactly.
> > Some effects I can think of:
> >
> > - "biggest" conference per total attendees is still dc7, but it isn't
> > that much bigger on any given day. This means lots of people came out
> > for just a subset of days, non-overlapping. (implication: dc13 needs
> > fewer beds than expected)
> >
> > - The conferences that have more appealing surrounding city (7, 10)
> > have a smaller proportion of people in accom. (implication: dc13 needs
> > more beds, counterbalancing the above)
> >
> > - it could be the dc13 attendees won't be as high as expected because
> > if it's more remote, fewer people will come out for just a few days.
> > Alternatively, if that isn't the case, it means the population won't
> > be so high as expected based on the big-city debconfs.
> >
> >
> > Basically, my main point is people should think not only in terms of
> > total conference sizes, but per-day attendees, and how that affects
> > things. I don't know the solution, and I don't have time or desire to
> > debate the finer points, so I'll leave it to you all to see.
> >
>
> Or another calculation attempt: I think our estimations should be based
> on the actual attendee count and not on those requesting accomodation. I
> expect the percentage of people arrangeing their own accomodation to be
> about 10%.
>
> capacity of DC13 (326 + 10%): 358
> max attendants on a single day at DC7: 267
> difference: 91 (= 34% of 267)
>
> What I want to say with this is even if we have 34% more attendees than
> DC7 or the DC7 numbers are wrong by up to 34% we still have enough beds
> at "Le Camp". I know this is a bit theoretical and has many if's. But
> this calculation makes the issue much less pressing than it seemed to me
> before.
Remember my update: there were about 100 more people who "arrived" who
were missing at least one date, which means they aren't included in
those numbers. You should ask people who were around then if they
came for just a day or multiple days. Also, these may be the kind of
people who go just because it's convenient, but wouldn't come out and
use our accom if using our accom was basically required.
I wish I had better answers... but all I can say is that my intuition
is the bed shortage isn't as bad as it seems, and can be managed with
some work. But it's a choice to make.
- Richard
--
| Richard Darst - rkd@ - boltzmann: up 1120 days, 11:33
| http://rkd.zgib.net - pgp 0xBD356740
| "Ye shall know the truth and -- the truth shall make you free"
Reply to: