Re: [Debconf-team] Suggestion for Professional / Corporate attendance Fee
On 2013-01-24 09:36, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
I don't like the category names, and I think we should not give names
to that category. Nobody should be labeled according the hosting. For
sponsors it is different, the category is a selling point and
according category they are shown differently on various places.
I also don't see a reason to give them special names. If we must have
names, I think it's confusing to use ones that sound like the
sponsorship levels.
I would provide standard accommodation to sponsored people (thus not
discount for better beds), or not for seldom and higher priced
categories.
I'm a bit torn between saying that sponsored people shouldn't take
sponsorship and then also pay for a better room, and just accepting that
them paying gives us some money.
I think we should add also category for 2 beds, for the couples.
Probably, though it's not 100% clear that couples should get higher
priority on small rooms than others. (Some others have different
reasons to strongly prefer small rooms.)
And I prefer to "sell" the room as my proposed method: we write only
the maximum number of people/bed per room (and try to scatter the
free
beds on all categories). A ">=" could be confusing.
The advantage of selling them this way is splitting room allocation out
from room pricing. You would pay for the "guarantee" of a certain
maximum room size (though in practice if you didn't get that size we
just wouldn't charge you for it, it's not a real guarantee).
Conference fee should be per week (conference bag, t-shirt,
infrastructure is per DC, not per day)
Yes, that makes sense.
The fees should also cover (more than) the attendee's proportion of
central costs (venue rental etc.), but for dividing those up I would
prefer to treat all attendees equally rather than charge less for coming
less time.
--
Moray
Reply to: