[Debconf-team] reports from Le Camp "BSP", part 6: trust + seeing is believing
Hi,
so in the beginning of my switzerland visit I was thinking why I was there and
that this why should be documented. So let's do this here for now, and then I
plan to put this into the wiki under Category:DebConfManual.
So what's the purpose of these venue/country pre-visits which we have done at
least four times in the past?
- meet unknown members of the localteam (unknown as in unknown in real life),
to be able to better "understand" the localteam (from a global team
perspective)
- the same in the other direction, new localteam members (as in new to
debconf-team) don't really know the global team members and often wonder how
things are ment, why long time team members have certain opinions and so on.
Obviously if only 1-3 global team members do such a pre-visit the local team
cannot get to know the whole team better, but I believe people are captable to
transfer this to other not present people..
- so summarized, this is team building, so that we become one debconf-team
eventually. In the beginning (each year), we have three (overlapping) teams:
localteam, globalteam and debconf-team. We don't want the localteam/globalteam
seperation, but due to the nature of the bid process and also the way we
organize Debconf, there are those two teams in the beginning of each DebConf
organisation phase. And during the cause of making DebConf happen we then
become one debconf-team, but we don't start as such. So one purpose of such
pre-visits is starting this process (which is a human process, not one which
can really be formalized.)
- then another big point is transferring trust: trustworthy people from the
globalteam "evaluate the localteam" and circumstances (be it venue, country or
whatever) to then share this with the rest of global/debconf-team. For example
the dc11-previsit didnt come back with "hard" proof (or written contracts!),
but it enabled us to (better) trust Adnan that his words of "dont worry there
will be no problem" were indeed based on reality.
- and also this trust things goes in the other direction, not so much to the
localteam (though also!) but mostly to local suppliers, mostly of venue,
accomodation but also food suppliers and others, which we try to meet on such
a pre-visit. DebConf is not a usual conference and Debian is not a usual
project/legal entity, granted we are big+powerful+reliable, but this is more
believable if indeed people from this project who live more far away come
around to proof this. And sure, again, these are not hard proofs, but for the
trust building part you don't need hard proofs. (Though people can eg google
my name+DebConf and see history, which is a lot more than just shaking hands
and trusting my friendly face.)
- and likewise, this evaluation is there to build up trust so that we trust
the local suppliers. A contract (and especially one which is drafted in
another language than its written) is always just a contract. There are
zillions ways to fullful contracts and its important to build a common
understanding of what the _deal_ should become.
From the meeting with Mr. Pianaro I can say that I'm confident that they are
interesting to make DebConf work, basically the way we want it. And this is
soo much more important than whatever contract on paper.
Last but not least I think we should have trust in ourselves and in the
localteam. At the end of 2011 we decided to hold DebConf in this slightly
different setting in Le Camp, as we trusted the swiss localteam that this
would give the best DebConf experience in Switzerland (within the countries
constraints, which mostly translates to: expensive) and we also trusted
ourselves to be able to come up with the needed sponsorship amount.
After having visited Switzerland, and having seen Interlaken, Le Camp plus
some other bits of Switzerland, I still (+again) share our decision and trust
(in ourselves) from back then. "Again", because I also lost courage a bit
(~200k is a lot of money) and I was also questioning Le Camp suitability after
reading the contract negotiations.
So I went to Le Camp with a quite bad feeling against the venue (which is
underlined by me just taking pictures of the bad beds and ommitting the good
ones, as I was really not in favor of it when I arrived there) and then I
left, supporting it again.
There are several reasons for that:
- Interlaken has several problems:
- no real team behind
- very much distributed within the city (long distances)
- city in an expensive country: some people would be able to affort
bars+restaurants, other not. So this would amplify the "switzerland is
expensive"-seperation, while Le Camp would flatten it down
- we would need to restart negotiations
- less and worse accomodation (200 beds in a winding youth hostel (1.5km
from the venue), plus 100 in large tents (2km from the venue)
- we will loose time getting sponsors as we will first need to work on
location+venue again
- Le Camp is indeed a very nice venue with *lots* of excellent working
spaces
- we need concentrated efforts to get the sponsors we need to be able to do
DebConf in Switzerland. Demotivating the team will not help us with that,
quite the contrary.
Micah brought up the topic that DebConf should not strive for becoming more
expensive every year and that we should be considerate about the locations we
choose. Changing continents every year is one part of this, but similar that
we went to NYC/the USA and then Bosnia and Nicaragua, I also think we should
go to other locations, be them more expensive like Switzerland, Japan or other
places, as well as "more affortable" locations and different settings.
Le Camp is a workable compromise IMO, and turninig it down now would put the
whole DebConf13 in danger, for the reasons outlined above and also because
Switzerland is so expensive, that all the cheap options are gone way in
advance.
Also, besides the demotivation issue (which surely will not demotivate
everyone and probably not forever - but this can be enough to make us fail to
get 20 or 40k which else we would have gotten) I dont think it's wise to
simply overrule both our old decision (
http://www.debian.org/News/2012/20120301.en.html ) as well as the localteams
decisions: those who have been to both venues, favor Le Camp.
(There is one very vocal "local", who never organized a DebConf and who didnt
visit Le Camp, not in favor.)
I was very worried about the budget and the contract and whether Le Camp would
work as a location. After going there, I'm still worried about getting enough
sponsorship money, but I'm not worried about the contract^w^wour agreement
with Le Camp and the suitability of it anymore. Le Camp and it's management is
fine for us. And budget worries (or rather the effects of having less money)
would be way worse elsewhere.
So changing things now would make me *really* worried, we would loose time
(which is money), people and we would make a bad precedence for future years.
Maybe we shouldnt have choosen Switzerland one might think, but I disagree for
two reasons: 1. diversity also means going to "rich countries" 2. even if this
DebConf will be expensive, we will only get the money because it's held in an
expensive area, where companies are willing+able to donate this money to us. I
can speak for german companies here: sponsoring a conference in Nicaragua has
no value for them, while it has in Switzerland.
So, back to trust. I've been involved in organizing ten DebConfs, I've done
sponsorship in the past and following it now, I've seen the budgets, I've
spoken about the contract directly with the other party, I've seen Le Camp and
Interlaken and I also dare to say that I can somehow assess our options of
getting other venues in less time (in short: just more expensive, as
Switzerland is not only expensive, but also _small_, so there is less choice
and choices tend to be, well, more expensive...), so I like you to trust me:
Le Camp is a good choice and it's actually the best option we have.
So what pre-visits will we do for DebConf14 and will we trust them?
Maybe its a good idea to have some funds agreed so that always 2 people go,
but then money was not the problem this time... .oO( Category:DebConfManual )
cheers,
Holger
Reply to: