[LGM] Direct me to wrap up of previous LGMs, please

[S.Kemter]

Hi,

I think it's enough at this point now. Getting sick of your poison you are
distributing the whole time here. There are 4 proposals, because Andreas
forgot to mention Buenos Aires. That means 3 are on your side of the
Atlantic. We all agreed in a meeting you was not seen in, that for the
future we like to see proposals in a higher quality in advance.
It was also agreed how to handle it this time, there is time until 15th of
May for all for putting together a proposal answering to all questions.
After that an IRC meeting will happen, where all open questions will be
answered and an decision will be made. There was not fixed who has the
right to vote in this meeting, it's an open process. There is also the
option that no majority can go for one place and also there was an
agreement to give more people the possibility to have there voice heard on
the mailing list. It looks to me like an fair and acceptable way how to
handle it, a huge step forward. Definitely better as the marshland we had
here before.

People who knows me well, know I have an memory like an elephant. So lets
go back what did happen in Vienna. Two proposals for 2013 Madrid and
Montreal. The majority was for Madrid and it was more an "could be" meaning
for Montreal 2014. It was more lets Louis not travel sad home....

>From 8 LGM 3 was in Montreal, I think a lot agree that's more then enough.
A lot will agree go there will destroy all opportunities we have now
putting a clear process how and when propose it and make LGM to an really
FLOSS event for all people interested in. Not for a few that like the
marshland like it was because they have there sheep in the try....

We will see what happen after 15th of May and where we go and how many of
the proposals stay as option for 2015 in case they are not taken for 2014.
But I fear after that unfortunate attempts here to enforce Montreal for
2014, nobody likes to go there also for 2015 even it has PyCon as an
argument in that year to.

What I wondering about is the arrogance that some have saying such things
like differ from other floss events and is something totally special. It is
not, some have to realize that. On all events the process is open and who
does the work decides.

This year on the table there was not only a lot of people, there was also a
lot of people who are involved in other floss events some of them are
bigger then the LGM such events like SCaLE, Flisol, FOSSASIA, LinuxTag,
Linux-Tage, DevConf.cz

speaking about participation where was your voice in the closing session or
on the table? So please stay away now from your poisonous mails trying to
enforce Montreal for 2014, it's not helpful we will find out soon where we
go for 2014 and then open it for 2015.

br gnokii

P.S. dont feed the troll





2013/4/24 Gregory Pittman <gpittman at iglou.com>

> On 04/23/2013 05:58 PM, Tobias Ellinghaus wrote:
>
>> Am Dienstag, 23. April 2013, 21:33:10 schrub Gregory Pittman:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>  Well, for one thing, decisions are not based on the results of an
>>> applause meter (as Femke mentioned at the time).
>>>
>> Since LGM is meant for the people actually going there an applause meter
>> might
>> very well be the best way to decide where to go. No idea if personal
>> preferences of a few committee members are any better, we will see in
>> about a
>> year by looking at the number of participants.
>>
>> But that's just my personal opinion.
>>
>>
>>  If you think about it though, there are some serious problems with this
> method. At the foremost, it turns to decision into cheering for a
> city/country, as opposed to seeing a proposed site in the context of the
> quality of the LGM that might take place there, and perhaps some sense of
> the economic and other challenges that attendees might face. The
> presumption that those who did not attend LGM this year but have in the
> past are no longer interested in LGM and unlikely to attend in future
> doesn't really have anything to back it up. It seems possible that there
> are some who cannot afford to attend every year, and proximity to where
> they live is a major issue. If we imagine, for example, that next year LGM
> might be in Leipzig, that would be 3 years in a row in Europe, rather
> skewing the assessment of attendance.
>
> I don't think it's unusual for groups who have meetings to rely on some
> committee for site selection. In the case of LGM, anyone who wishes to be
> part of this process has been welcomed to volunteer to help. In the past,
> few have come forward to volunteer their time and effort for the purpose.





>
>
> Greg
> ______________________________**_________________
> Libre-graphics-meeting mailing list
> Libre-graphics-meeting at lists.**freedesktop.org<Libre-graphics-meeting at lists.freedesktop.org>
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/**mailman/listinfo/libre-**graphics-meeting<http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libre-graphics-meeting>
>



-- 
make me rich, buy my Inkscape book http://is.gd/yq5OD0 ;)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libre-graphics-meeting/attachments/20130424/060903ed/attachment.html>