Cate,
We need to give them the possibility to book it with other clients. We can't just block 2 weeks and maybe only take one.
But we could tell them that we might be interested in some buildings for the first week if we have enough money and we'll reserve them later if they're still available. But that they don't need to keep them blocked for now. (This should just be mentioned to them and not put in any contract)
Philipp
I propose a A2 option: We tell LeCamp: we are committed to come in LeCamp, but now we don't have enough money. We (local team) are pretty sure that we will have enough money for the two weeks, but *now* we can only book for 7 or 10 days (not to have financial troubles or giving you financial troubles).
PS. I'm away, so no meeting for me tonight.
Ciao. Cate
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud <odyx@debian.org> wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>thanks Gaundenz for this concise and clear mail that summarizes my
>feelings
>quite well.
>
>Le jeudi, 22 novembre 2012 12.04:52, Gaudenz Steinlin a écrit :
>> IMO the most important topic for tonights meeting is the decision
>about
>> how to proceed with Le Camp. We promised them to have a decision by
>the
>> end of November. So to be fair and keep that promise we have to
>decide
>> now.
>
>Yes, absolutely. Either way. Postponing the decision with regards to Le
>Camp
>means deciding against Le Camp as far as (I understand) our discussion
>with
>their director go. So we should rather take that "no" decision than
>postponing.
>
>> C) We decide to drop Le Camp and to find another venue. While this
>> avoids the costs of Le Camp this has considerable other costs. I
>> think there is agreement among the locals that more than 10%
>cheaper
>> is just not possible. But we will also loose a lot of motivation.
>> Unless we find something very similar to Le Camp, this won't be
>the
>> DebConf we presented in our bid. (...)
>
>This is a quite important argument IMHO.
>
>This has been challenged before by some saying that the locals of the
>team
>could just organize another DebConf, around Switzerland (and not
>necessarily
>in LeCamp, but that's tengential to the point).
>
>While this might eventually be true, what I can say is that it isn't
>for me:
>I'm motivated by the organisation of DebConf13 in LeCamp (or in a
>LeCamp-ish
>location) because that's what we opted for as a group and what we
>proudly
>presented as our option during the bid process. Organizing a different
>DebConf
>was an full part of our project. That said, I'm also a volunteer and I
>can't
>(and won't) garantee to stay motivated (or involved fwiw) if we decide
>to go
>another way. That's not to put pressure on the decision process, but I
>feel
>it's important to be conscious of the downsides of going the C) way.
>
>> In our opinion we have to take a decision now and should absolutely
>not
>> postpone. If no decision is taken, I will take a vacation from
>Debconf
>> organisation until at least the end of this year. The emotional
>stress
>> of the current situation is just too much for me and I think that I
>> better spend my time on other things in this case. While I have a
>> preference for one option, I can live with any decision as long as
>there
>> is a decision now.
>
>Absolutely; and I am leaning to do mostly the same.
>
>This indecision doesn't help to move this (our) project forward and
>eats a lot
>of (my) energy by itself; we have to get out of it, as soon as
>possible.
>
>> Conclusion: My preference is A over B over C.
>
>+ 1.
>
>Cheers,
>
>OdyX
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Debconf-team mailing list
>Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
>http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team