[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-sponsors-team] Sponsor brochure for DC16 - early thoughts.

On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 8:27 PM, martin f krafft <madduck@debconf.org> wrote:
also sprach Bernelle Verster <bernellev@gmail.com> [2015-04-05 12:21 +0200]:
>    1. Is there info somewhere showcasing the diversity outreach projects?

I don't think this effort has kicked off. There's a bit of stuff
happening around Outreachy and Tom Marble might be a good person to
talk to, as well as David Bremner and Molly le Blanc, if you can get
her interested.

>    2. Has there ever been company specific hack challenges/ BOFs on company
>    specific projects? If so, what was the experience? If not, do you think
>    this could be valuable, and something sponsors would be willing to pay for?

Not that I know of. Companies have sponsored sprints, but we get
very very very very very protective as soon as money and "content"
meet. Could you elaborate on your idea(s)?
As per previous email,  If Debian is used in all these companies that sponsor, then they must have an interest in making it work better. My thinking behind this was that there may be issues that they would like to see improved, but for some reason, bureaucracy or whatnot, haven't gotten to it. These issues may be perfect for a BOF, and would I guess in the past have been proposed by a 'normal' attendee who happens to work for that company. What would the implications be to have the company support this?  
Alternatively these can also be sponsored without having a say over content, like the session sponsors idea?

>    3. Please clarify, DCx is the x+1th annual conference, correct? So DC15
>    is the 16th, and DC16 will be the 17th annual conference?

Correct. Counting starts at 0.

And while I also agree that we have MiniDebConfs etc., we do have
one main DebConf each year and being able to say that we are
collecting funds for the 16th iteration was IMHO a door-opener too
for DC15.

Yay, my first exposure to bikeshedding! Not getting more involved here, will discuss briefly at the next meeting. From offline discussions I'm considering DC2016, the 17th conference - but PLEASE let's not discuss this on this thread! Create a whiteboard with your views if any and link it to the minutes: http://whiteboard.debian.net/9fcb2.wb or something like that.
>    4. I'm thinking of including the Debian family tree as an image
>       in the brochure, with a link to the high res version [1]. Do
>       you think this is a good idea? This, in my mind, would serve
>       as an intro to out-of-industry sponsors, and a handy
>       reference point to existing sponsors. I may well be
>       mistaken.

Anything goes. I just wouldn't make the brochure too long. It's your
domain though.

>    5. Shall we distinguish DebianDay very specifically? Should
>       DebianDay have its own well defined brand?

For a start, DC15 is not having a DebianDay (but an Open Weekened).
I am not sure about this. It's never been a flying success, so it's
not a brand yet.
Will think more then, glad to see no clear resistance, or am I mistaken? 

>    6. Shall we have particular session sponsors? So one more company logo
>    in addition to Platinum and Gold for each session, which differs from
>    session to session?

From my experience, this will not fly. I tried to suggest naming
meeting rooms after sponsors, and that was voted down.
I would also not agree to meeting room-sponsors.  

>    7. What does this mean: TODO we should add a statement about ordering
>    within each level so that all sponsors know the rules from the start.

If A pays 110% of B, what does it mean? Initially we thought we
would let A rank before B but we've since come to toss this idea.
Now it's first-come, first-serve, and if you want to pay more than
the level then that's great. Might be worth suggesting a perk
instead, but it's actually favourable to have non-earmarked money.
Got it.  

>    8. Do we want to do a pick-and-choose sponsor model?

This has been tried in the past and it didn't work, i.e. brought us
less income.
Agreed. This was an idea flighted at my last event, but I left before it was implemented, so didn't know how it worked, if it did. So we drop this idea. 

>    One would work out the pricing such that if the same things get
>    chosen the way they are currently structured,

it's already hard to work out pricing for the packages. Why make it
more difficult? We don't have a market to resonate against, so it's
really a single shot.
My reason behind this was to find out what the sponsors see as valued benefits. Still trying to get behind that questionnaire, to be honest. Also, madduck, you promised to look into that once I started the brochure draft, so, ball's in your court, honey :P 

 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org> @martinkrafft
: :'  :  DebConf orga team
`. `'`
  `-  DebConf15: Heidelberg, Germany: http://debconf15.debconf.org
      DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16

Reply to: