[LGM] Fwd: LGM2014 decision meeting, Saturday at 16.00 UTC

[Gregory Pittman]

On 05/11/2013 09:02 AM, Andreas Vox wrote:
> Am 11.05.2013 um 14:47 schrieb Gregory Pittman:
>
>> On 05/11/2013 05:33 AM, Mario Behling wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I also have some other remarks to the discussion in this thread: in
>>> Madrid, there was a meeting, there were proposals, everyone who wanted
>>> to participate could participate and we all got together instead of
>>> browsing the city. Now the list gets extended and Sirko is taken off
>>> the list because of personal disparities or why?
>>>
>>> The meeting in Madrid was well announced. We had an in-depth
>>> discussion. Different ideas were discussed and as far as I could see a
>>> consensus was reached. After that, we keep seeing different proposals
>>> how to decide a venue popping up. Then suddenly, there is an LGM board
>>> announced that existed, even though there was not a mentioning of this
>>> before and it seems not everyone from the so-called board is even
>>> interested to involve.
>>>
>> It's interesting that you are concerned that a decision you were involved with might risk subsequent changes, since this is exactly what happened this year at LGM, when the decision from LGM 2012 for LGM 2014 was changed to include new proposals.
> If there was a decision for LGM 2014 in 2012, why wasn't it announced?
>
>
I think this illustrates how the lack of a formal process is hindering 
decision-making. There was initially a proposal for Montreal in 2013 at 
LGM 2012. Femke brought Madrid as a substitute, due to the concurrent 
Interactivos event which was planned. Thus, some of us (Louis, I think 
included) had the impression that Montreal would be postponed until 
2014, so that Madrid could step in -- there were no other proposals for 
2014 in 2012. We were sincerely in the best interests of LGM trying to 
establish this 2-year process. Apparently this went over a lot of heads, 
or they weren't listening, or they disagreed.

I know we are scheduled to have this IRC meeting today, but we can count 
on complaints later that someone was excluded, as if it were intentional.

It would be great to have the luxury of only needing to gather proposals 
and carefully go over proposals for 2015 at this time, but instead we 
are still stuck with indecision for 2014.

Greg