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

FOSDEM feedback


Those of you who made it to FOSDEM will have noticed me asking for
feedback. So far I've only received one mail with comments, so I guess
that must mean it's been a great FOSDEM for more people than just
myself and that I should (mostly) go on as I've been doing for now.

Anyhow, one thing I'd like to rethink for next year is how we'll
organize the booth by then. I could ask about that then, but since it's
all still fresh in our memory at this point in time, I figured it's
probably better to ask about it now, write it all down, and then figure
out something better by next year.

Currently, I organize the FOSDEM booth by having people sign up
beforehand who will then all do one hour of "booth duty", and are
supposed not to leave the booth during their one designated hour. The
reason I do it this way is to ensure nothing happens to the hardware
and/or money that's left at the booth; given how there are literally
thousands of people at FOSDEM, we can't just assume they're all nice and
good people. I could of course assign just two people to man the booth
all weekend, but then they would be unable to walk around and see other
things which they might want to see. That's why I chose to have duty
shifts of one hour: so that I'm not imposing on anyone's time.

However, in preparing for the booth this year, it was brought to my
attention that this year and last year some people of the Debian-UK
crowd had been at or near the booth all weekend anyway, so that they
would be able to take care of the money; apparently they wanted to be
slightly more sure about that. I don't have anything against this, but
obviously if people don't consider the way I've been organizing things
to be secure enough, then we need to do it differently.

So, there we are, I need to find a different way to organize the booth
at FOSDEM for next year. Any suggestions?

<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
  -- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22

Reply to: