| |||||||||||||
Rethinking linux.conf.auRethinking linux.conf.auPosted Aug 30, 2012 21:46 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)Parent article: Rethinking linux.conf.au
disclaimer, I am part of the volunteer staff that puts on SCaLE
> Even a city as nice as Ottawa gets a little tiresome after several years in a row
are people attending the conference to see the conference content, or to see the city?
This seems like the least important reason to pick a location, especially for a FOSS conference.
"professional" conferences where the attendees are traveling on expense accounts may need more weight on the tourist aspect of things, but where most people are paying their own way, there are other far more important things.
Moving a conference around spreads the travel costs (i.e. one year you may not have to pay much to travel to it as it's going to happen close to you, another year it may happen further away)
Keeping a conference in one location lets the volunteers build experience rather than having to learn 'running conferences 101' from scratch each year. It also makes it easier for a conference to accumulate equipment that they can re-use.
Of course, you need to have a large enough volunteer population so that you don't become completely dependent on a small number of people and burn them out. This is partly a location issue and partly related to how the particular staff handles newcomers (and this can vary from team to team even within one conference)
It's also really hard for a conference to shrink as economic times get tight, and I think that handling that had more to do with the problems of OLS than the fact that people got tired of one city.
(Log in to post comments)
Rethinking linux.conf.au Posted Aug 31, 2012 9:57 UTC (Fri) by clintonroy (subscriber, #6660) [Link]
> are people attending the conference to see the conference content, or to see the city?
Both, we hope.
For most of our international guests, any city in Australia is a hike, and it makes sense to tag some tourist time onto the conference trip.
For locals such as myself, almost all of my travelling around Australia has been tagged on the end of LCA conferences.
Rethinking linux.conf.au Posted Aug 31, 2012 12:12 UTC (Fri) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
It has a bigger impact than one might think. Even repeating a conference in the same place risks losing attendees because it becomes harder for them to justify going if they don't get the full benefit of combining it with some sightseeing. That said, going to the same place again does allow you to use your knowledge of the location and perhaps enjoy it a bit more. Of course, you need to have a large enough volunteer population so that you don't become completely dependent on a small number of people and burn them out. This is partly a location issue and partly related to how the particular staff handles newcomers (and this can vary from team to team even within one conference) I think a key issue is managing the interactions between local and long-term organisers. I've seen a lot of enthusiasm when organising conferences, but this can manifest itself as throwing existing solutions overboard and trying to show everyone how things are done. People can demonstrate a lot in doing this, but it encourages the same mentality in others, and this can lead to the loss of long-term organisers. Mentioned in the article, possibly the biggest challenge is related to conference size. Everyone seems to want to ramp up their conference to be the biggest, but not only does this potentially undermine the conference experience, it also makes it very difficult for another local organisation to take over. Nobody getting into the conference game wants a thousand person conference to land in their lap when they've organised nothing larger than a user group meeting or something on that scale. I actually think this tendency to super-size conferences is actually quite destructive, and I think more - not larger - conferences is the answer.
Rethinking linux.conf.au Posted Aug 31, 2012 18:05 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
If you can have a relatively stable conference staff, new people don't have to jump in and take over a large conference, they can join an existing team and get their feet wet, then move up in responsibility (letting the earlier people relax a bit or do other things they are interested in.
As for conference size, it's a lot easier to add a few rooms, or even a day to an existing conference than it is to set a new one up from scratch. You always get people saying "this was good, but if just added this one thing it would be even better"
Also, if you say you want to not have a big conference, how do you do it? tell people walking up to registration that they aren't allowed to attend?
Rethinking linux.conf.au Posted Aug 31, 2012 22:34 UTC (Fri) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
It is true that people can get their feet wet and then find themselves immersed a bit more deeply - locally involved people gain responsibility from year to year, for example - but the progression from local organiser to "stable conference staff" isn't always as easy.
Firstly, local organisers can get burned out and feel that once someone else is hosting a conference, they're happy to take a back seat. Secondly, if other local organisers are happy to do a lot of the "stable" work, then it's difficult to see why one would have a "stable conference staff" until the venue has to move again. I still have involvement in a conference where, like linux.conf.au, there are challenges in finding another host in a couple of years.
As for conference size, it isn't necessarily easy to add rooms. Conferences have to be pretty careful choosing the right size venue unless money is no object, and in certain situations there's no possibility of adding rooms without moving up to a much bigger and different kind of venue. Once you get up to the thousand person conference, there are serious financial risks involved.
Some conferences have addressed the issue of becoming too big by having a cap on the number of attendees. You can also raise prices, too, but that risks turning community conferences into corporate affairs with all that this brings with it. And yes, I would imagine that most conferences of the nature of linux.conf.au discourage "at the door" registration with much more expensive pricing and, indeed, the risk of not being able to get in at all.
If you're really interested in going to a particular conference, you sign up while there are still tickets. If you miss your chance, there's a growing consensus that supporting another conference on the same topic is not only the next best thing, but also the right thing to do.
Rethinking linux.conf.au Posted Sep 1, 2012 6:15 UTC (Sat) by speedster1 (subscriber, #8143) [Link]
> disclaimer, I am part of the volunteer staff that puts on SCaLE
> >> Even a city as nice as Ottawa gets a little tiresome after several years in a row > > are people attending the conference to see the conference content, or to see the city? > >This seems like the least important reason to pick a location, especially for a FOSS conference.
As an attendee of every SCaLE thus far, that was my first thought as well.
LA is *not* a place I enjoy visiting, but it is a very practical conference location in that there are plenty of nearby LUGs, schools, and universities with interested people plus LAX is a major international airport for convenience of non-local speakers and attendees.
|
|||||||||||||