Re: [Debconf-team] reports from Le Camp "BSP", part 5: pics
Daniel Pocock dijo [Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 09:00:29AM +0100]:
> > sigh - for me not taking more pictures of the nice spaces at Le Camp.
...Sigh indeed :(
> The focus of these emails has only been on the 32 bed dorm (so it should
> not be generalised to the rest of Le Camp): and I believe I am the only
> one who has given a constructive suggestion, namely, removing 8 (or
> more) of the beds to create spaces between the beds. So I think it is
> wrong to suggest I am showing some kind of bias. I think my suggestion
> is fair to all sides (and also fair to those people who will have to
> sleep in the room, the people everybody seems to be forgetting here when
> they draw a line in the sand and make ultimatums like "Le Camp or not in
> Switzerland")
Although you did suggest this suggestion, I do not think it is
feasible — If you look at the furniture in that room, it is one big
bed with many mattresses over it, next to one another. Yes, some
*mattresses* can be taken away, but not *beds*.
But, yes, I do think that, given we will be given access to setting up
tents, we can leave the Huge Room as a last resort; quite probably it
will never be fully packed. And having a, say, 16 people room, while
still over the line for many, will surely be more acceptable than a 32
people room.
> > The tent village of Balmers has tents of 24qm with 5 (or 6) small bunk-beds,
> > plus 4(?) showers for the whole 100 people camping there.
>
> See my comment above - neither Le Camp or Interlaken is going to give
> five star luxury in this price range. However, we don't have to use the
> tent village, it can just be seen as an `overflow' solution.
Well, we are not in a position to take a more expensive hotel as our
main option. I think that, if we go to Interlaken, we will put all
sponsored people in the tent village - And allow them to pay for
something nicer if they prefer. So, yes, I do consider the tent
village as our Interlaken base.
> Interlaken also has a range of hotels for people willing to go beyond 25
> CHF/night budget. For about 40 CHF/night, you can go in the very new
> looking hostel near the Interlaken Ost station. Le Camp offers no such
> choice for the people who reject the 32 bed dorm.
Right. However, this can also be seen in a different light.
We always try to make DebConf great for everybody. And I hope we can
make DC13 great for everybody as well. But we just *cannot* please
everybody. There are always tradeoffs - In DC10 we were prejudiced
against people who didn't (or couldn't) want to travel to the
USA. In DC12 several people didn't want the hassle of going to a
chaotic, hot country, and didn't attend. And probably in DC13 we will
lose some people that are not willing to put up with lesser-quality
lodging. We cannot be everything for everybody.
Yes, there is this point that those people are the ones most likely to
pay corporate/professional. We can *try* to include them, and weigh in
alternative proposals (such as the one you have kindly worked on and
are now promoting). But having a 3-star hotel cannot be a sine-qua-non
for DebConf.
> > That 32 people room at Le Camp is definitly not everybodys taste, and as such
> > I dont think we should force people in there. But, doh, thats quite obvious if
> > you ask me. (And eg Daniels comment that we need to fill it, before we can
> > allow people to camp at Le Camp, does not reflect reality.)
>
> It is reality, just a French version of it:
>
> "Location éventuelle de tentes par DebConf 13. (Seulement si le nombre
> de 300 personnes est dépassé) Nuites à incluire dans le decompte: CHF 10"
>
> That's what the contract says. Fill 300 beds before one tent is permitted
Right. But remember that all contracts are just drafts until they are
signed. If, as both the pro-LeCamp-swiss-team and Holger have
repeatedly said, Mr. Pianaro and Le Camp's management are interested
in having us there and provide what we need, this clause can be
changed. I think from Holger's conversation we should not be required
to assure >90% occupancy before the first tent is set.
> > As much as I'd love to do GourmetConf, can we please stop with RumorConf?
>
> A photo is not a rumor
But an interpretation of it clearly is.
Reply to: