GUADEC Committee: 7 November 2011 Meeting

Meeting Information

IRC channel: irc://

Time: 16:00 - 17:30 UTC

  • 08:00 Los Angeles/San Francisco
  • 11:00 Boston/Montreal/New York
  • 16:00 London
  • 17:00 Berlin/Madrid


  1. Review action items from last meeting (see minutes at

    • Sponsor brochure - also, review draft
    • Press release
    • Program committee
    • Special topics/tracks
  2. Status from local team
  3. Sponsors
    • Steps to finish brochure
    • Who will approach potential sponsors, and how?
    • Coordinate on list of potential sponsors
  4. Infrastructure
    • Web site and guadec-planning list
    • Options for registration and paper submissions
  5. Desktop Summit - has report been received/reviewed?
  6. Other items

Meeting Minutes


  • Bob Murphy (bobert)
  • Brian Cameron (yippi)
  • Chema Casanova (txenoo)
  • Joaquim Rocha (jrocha)
  • Karen Sandler (karenesq)
  • Mario Sánchez (msanchez)
  • William Carlson (williamfromtexas)



Much discussion about the monetary amounts for sponsorship levels. Consensus was the levels will be set by agreement with the GUADEC team and the GNOME foundation board. Reviewed levels from years past. Discussion of perks for sponsors, including free passes, and a special dinner. Consensus was:

  • Tentatively set sponsorship cost levels at (Euros) 35k, 20k, 10k, 5k, 1k
  • Platinum (top) level might be changed based on feedback from potential sponsors
  • We might offer some perks for sponsorship like a special dinner/party for networking, or free badges.

karenesq also suggested having a legal term for the unlikely event that GUADEC has to be cancelled, and offered to draft something.

Further discussion about some kind of perk for long-time sponsors, such as an additional level or a discount. GNOME Asia offered a discount. Consensus was to make any such perks public. Several suggestions were made, such as a 6% discount for previous sponsors which would go to 10% if the sponsor increased their level compared to last time. Discussion will move to the email list.

Press Release

Draft is at - further review at next meeting.


Still no response from Olav Vitters about the guadec-planning list. txenoo suggested creating a new planning list for GUADEC 2012 at GPUL's mailmain. txenoo also discovered several people who have access to update the registrar information. jrocha suggested a Twitter/ account for GUADEC; williamfromtexas had control of both accounts from 2010.


Much discussion of logos, layouts, etc. Everybody on the chat admitted to not being a good designer. williamfromtexas offered to check the 2010/2011 logs to see if there was a designer we might approach.

Action Items

  • karenesq: Canvass potential Platinum sponsors about the sponsorship cost, draft legal section term for event cancellation
  • bobert: Move long-time sponsor perk to email list
  • williamfromtexas: Check 2010/2011 logs to see if there was a designer we might approach.


(04:30:59 PM) The topic for #guadec is: Next meeting is 7 November at 16:00 UTC - see for agenda
(04:54:45 PM) muelli [] entered the room.
(04:56:35 PM) bobert [] entered the room.
(04:58:22 PM) txenoo left the room (quit: txenoo).
(04:59:02 PM) ***karenesq finishes working on some of her outstanding action items :)
(04:59:15 PM) bobert: :)
(04:59:52 PM) karenesq: thanks bobert for keeping such good minutes
(05:00:23 PM) bobert: I hate the time changes. It always takes me a week to get adjusted.
(05:00:46 PM) karenesq: yes definitely
(05:00:48 PM) bobert: It's now 16:00 UTC. Let's wait a couple of minutes to see who else joins.
(05:00:54 PM) ***karenesq goes to grab coffee
(05:01:05 PM) williamfromtexas: UTC time doesn't help, it has no time changes
(05:01:35 PM) bobert: True, that.
(05:03:09 PM) muellisoft left the room (quit: Ping timeout: 600 seconds).
(05:04:15 PM) txenoo [] entered the room.
(05:04:54 PM) txenoo: hi
(05:05:17 PM) bobert: Okay, let's go ahead and get started. I see we have a few people who haven't been here before, so let's introduce ourselves. I'm Bob Murphy, located in California.
(05:05:53 PM) txenoo: I'm Chema Casanova, located in Coruña.
(05:06:04 PM) msanchez: I'm Mario Sánchez, located in Coruña
(05:06:04 PM) williamfromtexas: I'm William Carlson, located in Barcelona
(05:06:08 PM) jrocha: I'm Joaquim Rocha, in Coru?a as well
(05:06:40 PM) karenesq: I'm Karen Sandler, located in New York
(05:07:44 PM) bobert: Thank you all for being here today!
(05:08:08 PM) bobert: It looks like there's been a lot of activity on the sponsor brochure text.
(05:08:37 PM) karenesq: it's starting to shape up! :)
(05:08:37 PM) bobert: Does anybody have any comments or suggestions about it that haven't been added to the text?
(05:09:06 PM) txenoo: msanchez and jrocha have been reviewing the document
(05:09:18 PM) karenesq: I have a question on the legal section, but we can save it for after the substantive discussion
(05:09:38 PM) williamfromtexas: I don't know if we want to talk about pictures or other visuals here, or let that for a side conversation with design team
(05:10:14 PM) yippi [~bc99092@] entered the room.
(05:10:17 PM) bobert: Let's leave that for a side discussion
(05:10:29 PM) yippi: hello
(05:10:37 PM) bobert: Hello yippi!
(05:10:42 PM) ***karenesq waves
(05:11:51 PM) karenesq: bobert: I liked the list of reasons to sponsor
(05:12:04 PM) bobert: Thanks!
(05:13:18 PM) msanchez: so, when reviewing that pad, the main doubt Joaquim and me had was about the amount of money for the Platinum package
(05:13:18 PM) bobert: I was trying to imagine a company that didn't have strong open-source ideals as a corporate goal, and think about what would attract them.
(05:13:51 PM) msanchez: opps, sorry, perhaps it's not the right moment to bring that point up (first time in this meeting)
(05:14:14 PM) bobert: Not a problem - actually, I was about to bring that up.
(05:14:17 PM) jrocha: msanchez, we gotta start somewhere, should we discuss this?
(05:14:20 PM) karenesq: In the past have we felt out companies in advance about the amounts they could sponsor?
(05:15:07 PM) bobert: karenesq: Good question.
(05:15:33 PM) bobert: Also, who normally makes the final decision on the sponsorship levels - the GUADEC team, or the foundation board?
(05:16:13 PM) msanchez: bobert: ok. So our point is that 45K could look like too much for this GUADEC, considering it's not a DS. On GUADEC 2010 it was 30K, so perhaps it would make sense to have something closer to that
(05:16:34 PM) msanchez: we thought of 35K as something reasonably affordable, while still "distant enough" from last level (gold), by +15K (being this the max separation between levels)
(05:16:45 PM) msanchez: karenesq: good point indeed. No idea
(05:17:13 PM) txenoo: bobert: I suppose this is an agreement between local team and foundation.
(05:17:15 PM) bobert: msanchez: I like your thinking on this.
(05:18:02 PM) jrocha: also, msanchez and I think that the 45 K for the last DS was too much given the conditions, in comparison with other sponsoring levels
(05:18:04 PM) williamfromtexas: msanchez, so would the steps be: 35, 20, 10, 5, 1 ?
(05:18:25 PM) msanchez: williamfromtexas: that's what we thought it could make more sense, in our opinion
(05:18:36 PM) bobert: I'd rather make the platinum level more affordable, and attract more people to do it, than to have it be more expensive and maybe have nobody do it.
(05:18:46 PM) ***williamfromtexas looks for GUADEC2010 brochure to compare levels
(05:18:49 PM) karenesq: I think the levels should be set by agreement with the GUADEC team and the foundation board
(05:18:51 PM) msanchez: but hey... hard to tell without some additional input from people with more experience in the matter, companies...
(05:18:53 PM) jrocha: yes, we even talked about 30 K vs 35 K but we set it so it was distant enough like msanchez said
(05:19:17 PM) karenesq: I think we should contact any likely top sponsors for GUADEC and see what they're thinking
(05:19:20 PM) williamfromtexas: 2010 was: 35, 25, 15, 5, 1
(05:19:31 PM) msanchez: karenesq: +1
(05:19:35 PM) karenesq: it won't help to set a top level and have no one sign up for it
(05:19:46 PM) bobert: karenesq: My feeling exactly
(05:19:47 PM) msanchez: williamfromtexas: then I had the wrong brochure for 2010. Mine said 30K
(05:20:07 PM) bobert: And I've looked at some past conferences and seen nobody at the top level.
(05:20:33 PM) williamfromtexas: i think intel was the only one at the top for the DS
(05:21:03 PM) jrocha: williamfromtexas, yes, it was.
(05:21:16 PM) williamfromtexas: so could we feel out intel and set them at top?
(05:21:32 PM) bobert: I'm also thinking a bit longer term on this, and the more people who are at the top level in 2012, the more impressive the conference will look to potential sponsors in future years.
(05:22:29 PM) ***karenesq goes to #marketing to share the link to the sponsorship brochure draft
(05:22:34 PM) msanchez: bobert: agreed. it would be great if we could attract some sponsors like Google or Canonical to go for the max level, IMHO
(05:22:38 PM) txenoo:
(05:22:46 PM) jrocha: we should not forget that we're talking about GUADEC only and this means one community there only, instead of two (GNOME and KDE)
(05:23:00 PM) txenoo: The link to the 2010 brochure
(05:23:05 PM) karenesq: I think it will be hard to get canonical to up their sponsorship for GUADEC after this last DS
(05:23:18 PM) karenesq: but we can try!
(05:23:43 PM) txenoo: I found the document in the git repository of 2010 website
(05:23:53 PM) bobert: txenoo: Nice!
(05:23:53 PM) jrocha: karenesq, why do you say that? because of their usage of Qt for Unity?
(05:24:32 PM) yippi: how many top level sponsors were there at the last Desktop Summit and GUADEC?
(05:25:07 PM) yippi: if there are too few, it might indicate that we might get more sponsorship if we didn't make the top level so high.
(05:25:41 PM) williamfromtexas: yippi: i think top level sponsors like being elite. it doesnt work if there are too many of them
(05:25:50 PM) karenesq: jrocha: because they perceived a lot of negative sentiment, the feedback I got was that it was getting harder to justify the expense
(05:25:55 PM) yippi: sure, but 1 is perhaps too few
(05:26:13 PM) yippi: Desktop Summit only had 1 top level sponsor and 2 2nd level
(05:26:31 PM) bobert: I've been looking for info about the 2010 sponsors but haven't been able to find anything
(05:26:33 PM) jrocha: karenesq, yeah, I suspected that.. sadly.
(05:27:49 PM) jrocha: yippi, I'd say the idea would be to balance things more. like have more than 1 platinum sponsor but also without making it so low that we get 5 platinum sponsors and 2 gold ones...
(05:27:55 PM) andreasn [] entered the room.
(05:28:04 PM) Taj [] entered the room.
(05:28:16 PM) williamfromtexas: i have a list of 2010 sponsors (as distributed on the conf USB) but it doesnt list their level
(05:28:17 PM) yippi: jrocha, right
(05:28:33 PM) bobert: jrocha: I agree
(05:28:35 PM) jrocha: bobert, yeah, it's a shame one cannot access 2010' GUADEC website..
(05:28:42 PM) txenoo:
(05:29:15 PM) txenoo: you have access to the git they used for guadec-website in 2010, i'm reviewing if the levels are available there.
(05:29:26 PM) jrocha: txenoo, can you point us to the file with the list of ponsors so we don't need to look for it?
(05:30:13 PM) williamfromtexas:
(05:32:10 PM) bobert: Thank you, williamfromtexas
(05:32:36 PM) jrocha: williamfromtexas, thx
(05:32:36 PM) msanchez: Thx for the link, now realized some "Past GUADEC sponsors" are missing in the pad. Will add them
(05:32:37 PM) williamfromtexas: random tangent while we think about sponsor levels.. what about the color scheme of the conf? does local team decide?
(05:32:57 PM) williamfromtexas: it will dictate all other materials we make from here on out
(05:33:15 PM) jrocha: it'd be cool to see the levels
(05:33:43 PM) bobert: It sounds like there's a consensus on sponsor levels that everything but Platinum (top level) is okay as it is, and Platinum should be low enough to attract more than one. Is that correct?
(05:33:49 PM) williamfromtexas: maybe it's on the badge.. /me goes to look for 2010 badge..
(05:33:50 PM) jrocha: I guess we can forget about MeeGo + Nokia
(05:34:39 PM) msanchez: bobert: I think that seems to be the idea
(05:35:07 PM) txenoo: williamfromtexas: about the color scheme we haven't worked on that yet. We were talking in the local team to have a simple design following the line of previous DS.
(05:36:42 PM) williamfromtexas: 2010 badge does not have levels.
(05:38:56 PM) jrocha: williamfromtexas, that's a shame :(
(05:39:12 PM) bobert: Let's plan for the moment to use the sponsor levels that jrocha and msanchez suggest
(05:39:14 PM) williamfromtexas: maybe a final 2010 budget will show something
(05:39:55 PM) jrocha: BTW, one question I think nobody asked so far: should we lower all the levels for some reason?
(05:40:19 PM) williamfromtexas: i think their suggestion was: 35, 20, 10, 5, 1 
(05:40:58 PM) bobert: And then let's leave platinum open for adjustment
(05:41:44 PM) bobert: jrocha: I can't think of a good reason why to change the other levels. They're spaced closely enough that companies can pick whichever one works best for them.
(05:41:47 PM) williamfromtexas: could it be 35, 25, 15, 5, 1 ? the middle section is likely to get the most sponsorship, and it would be great to get that extra 5k from pledges
(05:42:13 PM) yippi: another way to improve the sponsorship would be to offer a bit more for the higher levels.
(05:42:24 PM) yippi: perhaps we could give the platinum sponsor 5 free passes to the event or something.
(05:43:07 PM) yippi: just as a suggestion
(05:43:25 PM) williamfromtexas: what if it was 30, 25, 15, 5, 1... makes the top close enough for more people, and we get back the 5k they save on the middle-tier packages
(05:43:29 PM) bobert: yippi: I think that's a great idea. In fact, we might want to give free passes for everything bronze or above.
(05:43:59 PM) yippi: we should avoid giving away enough free passes to make it look like people are using sponsorships to buy passes.
(05:44:01 PM) bobert: Not necessarily the same number at each level, of course.
(05:44:14 PM) yippi: but a few free passes that make it clear that it is a gift would be appropriate I'd think
(05:44:14 PM) bobert: yippi: Correct
(05:44:41 PM) jrocha: I don't know about raiing the middle levels
(05:44:48 PM) williamfromtexas: 2010 had an exclusive event for companies who paid the top packages
(05:44:59 PM) yippi: yes, i think a special dinner is good
(05:45:09 PM) jrocha: it might end up scaring off some potential sponsors instead of attracting them to platinum... :/
(05:45:20 PM) yippi: an opportunity for sponros to network with the board and perhaps other key members of the community
(05:45:37 PM) yippi: kind of like a less official adboard meeting
(05:45:39 PM) williamfromtexas: yes. i don't recall such a thing at the DS
(05:45:41 PM) bobert: An exclusive event like a dinner would be a nice thing to be able to put into the brochure
(05:47:10 PM) williamfromtexas: ahh.. i know why it's not in the 2010 brochure - because it was tied in with suggested entrance fees. of course the event was free, but there was a corp-level fee that got you into the event. top sponsors might in this case get 5 or 10 employees in?
(05:47:22 PM) bobert: I agree raising the middle levels might scare some sponsors away, or cause some people who might have gone to a middle level to go for a lower level instead.
(05:47:42 PM) txenoo: i don't know if companies would be interested in having an especial dinner :-?
(05:48:02 PM) txenoo: I think that the amount of 10k should be maintained
(05:48:12 PM) williamfromtexas: ok, i retract my lets-rail-the-middle guys suggestion. :) i think everyone's happy with: 35, 20, 10, 5, 1
(05:48:27 PM) bobert: Sounds like a winner to me
(05:49:01 PM) bobert: karenesq had suggested also checking with some potential top sponsors, like Intel, to see what they think
(05:49:22 PM) jrocha: also, I don't mean to diminish GUADEC's importance but the last years' values we're talking about were for DS, a larger event, free entrance, for two communities, so, it makes no sense to raise the sponsorship fees IMHO
(05:49:38 PM) jrocha: ok
(05:49:46 PM) jrocha: is there a consensus then?
(05:49:49 PM) karenesq: bobert: I can take that action item if you want :)
(05:50:01 PM) bobert: Thank you, karenesq! :)
(05:50:15 PM) bobert: If there isn't a consensus, speak up now!
(05:50:32 PM) txenoo: ok
(05:50:39 PM) bobert: I'm good wit hit
(05:50:42 PM) bobert: -> with it
(05:52:20 PM) bobert: Okay, it seems there's consensus. Let's go with 35,20,10,5,1 with the understanding that we may have to change the Platinum level based on feedback from potential sponsors, and we might offer some "perks" for sponsorship like a special dinner/party for networking, or free badges.
(05:52:40 PM) bobert: Let's move on to the next agenda item - press release.
(05:52:50 PM) bobert: How's that coming? I haven't had a chance to look at the etherpad yet.
(05:53:22 PM) karenesq: oh wait, just to go back to the sponsorship brochure
(05:53:29 PM) karenesq: I wanted to ask one question on the legal terms
(05:53:50 PM) karenesq: we don't really have a provision for the unlikely event that the event has to be canceled
(05:53:53 PM) txenoo: sorry i have to review something there to
(05:54:11 PM) txenoo: to -> too
(05:54:49 PM) karenesq: do we want to include something? perhaps refund a portion of the money if the event is canceled outside of our control?
(05:55:06 PM) bobert: karenesq: Good point. That seems reasonable.
(05:55:16 PM) karenesq: ok, i'll draft something. 
(05:55:17 PM) jrocha: karenesq, good questions! it's good to have you here :D
(05:55:21 PM) txenoo: I agree
(05:55:22 PM) karenesq: :)
(05:55:24 PM) bobert: Thank you, karenesq! :)
(05:55:32 PM) txenoo: regarding the terms of the invoicing
(05:56:05 PM) txenoo: i have doubts about which organization should do the invoicing
(05:56:29 PM) txenoo: Item 3 says "within 30 days of receiving the invoice from the GNOME Foundation."
(05:56:44 PM) txenoo: I suppose that the invoice should be issued by GNOME HISPANO
(05:57:05 PM) yippi: another things we did with sponsorship last year was to do things like give sponsors an additional level if they were a long-time sponsor, do we plan to do that again?
(05:57:06 PM) karenesq: txenoo, for purposes of the sponsorship brochure I though it made sense to say that the amounts will be payable to whoever is designated by the GNOME Foundation
(05:57:13 PM) bobert: txenoo: I think you're right about that, since the local team will be handling the finances.
(05:57:20 PM) karenesq: yippi: how does that work?
(05:57:23 PM) yippi: i think the sponsors really like when we do things like that
(05:57:35 PM) williamfromtexas: i think that may also tie into where the sponsor form is returned to?
(05:57:39 PM) yippi: if an organization has sponsored more than a certain number of past GUADEC's, we give them an extra level
(05:57:43 PM) yippi: so they pay Gold, but get Platinum
(05:57:47 PM) karenesq: txenoo: I see. I will fix that...
(05:57:49 PM) bobert: What - kind of like frequent flyer points? :)
(05:58:00 PM) yippi: like if they have sponsored more than 6 past events.
(05:58:18 PM) yippi: or instead of giving them an extra level, we could give them a % discount of the cost.
(05:58:40 PM) txenoo: karenesq: we would solve this with "within 30 days of receiving the invoice from the organization designated by GNOME Foundation."
(05:58:46 PM) yippi: this encourages long-time sponsors to continue sponsoring, I think, and also encourages long-time sponsors to donate more
(05:59:00 PM) yippi: it is also a nice way to show them we appreciate their long-standing support
(05:59:13 PM) williamfromtexas: maybe that's something we can do on a case-by-case, eg, when we mail the brochure to our intel contact person, we can mention, 'hey, do the top package and we'll give you 10% off'"
(05:59:26 PM) karenesq: chema: thanks for fixing already. txenoo: done :)
(05:59:40 PM) bobert: Six sounds good to me, and I'd rather bump people a level. Again, thinking to future years, I'd rather see more people this year at higher levels, since it adds legitimacy to the conference to have more high-level sponsors.
(05:59:52 PM) yippi: i'd prefer if it were more public since it would encourage new sponsors to understand that if they keep sponsoring, they get more benefits.
(06:00:23 PM) karenesq: also it doesn't make it look like we recieved more money than we actually received
(06:00:26 PM) williamfromtexas: "Previous sponsors may apply for a 6% discount on packages"?
(06:01:02 PM) williamfromtexas: could be listed on the package table
(06:01:04 PM) bobert: yippi: I agree about making it public. I think "secret deals" for good sponsors would be a bad idea.
(06:02:14 PM) bobert: It sounds like there are some good ideas here. Let's think about them some more and talk about them at the next meeting.
(06:02:27 PM) yippi: actually, that approach of offering a discount was used at the last GNOME.Asia.
(06:02:30 PM) williamfromtexas: We could have the 6% statement on the package table, and then on the submission form a little check-box that says 'are you a previous sponsor?'
(06:02:36 PM) yippi: I don't think it's been used at GUADEC before.
(06:02:43 PM) yippi: but sponsors seemed to really like it
(06:03:00 PM) txenoo: What about something like "Previous sponsors may apply for a 6% discount on packages or 10% if they raise their previous sponsoring package?"
(06:03:12 PM) yippi: obviously, since it saved them money, and made them more visible in return for being good community sponsors
(06:03:31 PM) yippi: yes, i think we should be clever about how we apply the discount to encourage higher sponsorships
(06:04:00 PM) yippi: at GNOME.Asia, what they did was give a free level to any sponsor that previously sponsored every GNOME.Asia
(06:04:01 PM) bobert: yippi: So you're in favor of a discount rather than a bump, I take it?
(06:04:16 PM) yippi: but since they only had 3 events, before, that perhaps made more sense.
(06:04:21 PM) williamfromtexas: i like the 6/10% idea from txenoo
(06:04:27 PM) yippi: with GUADEC, a percentage idea probably makes more sense.
(06:04:48 PM) yippi: since there probably are no sponsors (or only a very few) that have sponsored every GUADEC.
(06:04:55 PM) bobert: It sounds like a winner to me!
(06:05:10 PM) williamfromtexas: the 10% is substantial at the next level up, and 6% is enough to get a nice fuzzy feeling at all levels
(06:05:11 PM) yippi: i'm just trying to encourage ways for us to be more clever with our sponsorship program to encourage sponsors
(06:05:44 PM) williamfromtexas: but how do we track this? case by case?
(06:05:54 PM) williamfromtexas: how do we know they are choosing the next level up?
(06:06:55 PM) txenoo: We have had the same levels from several years, so if they were bronze and they upgrade to silver that's fine.
(06:07:24 PM) txenoo: We should use the levels of last event, in this case the DS
(06:07:41 PM) bobert: williamfromtexas has a good point. We don't know what the sponsorship levels were for 2010, so we can't know if someone is doing a level change
(06:07:55 PM) williamfromtexas: ya but what if they say 'i choose bronze this year because this year i was going to choose nickle due to the financial crisis' - so it's a level up staying at the same level
(06:08:14 PM) jrocha: I would give a small discount if they are past sponsors and keep the same level as the last year (for praising "constant" sponsors) and increasing that discount based on the level
(06:09:08 PM) bobert: The discounts sound like a great idea.
(06:09:21 PM) jrocha: like: you have been a sponsor for 3 years on the silver level and you keep doing it this year: 5% discount on X tickets ; you upgraded to gold, 10%
(06:09:28 PM) yippi left the room (quit: Remote closed the connection).
(06:09:34 PM) bobert: But I'd like to take the discussion to the email list. We're over an hour into the meeting and we're still on the first agenda item. :)
(06:09:47 PM) txenoo: ok
(06:09:52 PM) williamfromtexas: yes, it deserves a little more thought :)
(06:09:53 PM) txenoo: let's move to the list
(06:10:24 PM) williamfromtexas: press release: i don't know if there's a pad for the press release yet. should i cook something up?
(06:10:37 PM) bobert: It's up on one:
(06:10:45 PM) williamfromtexas: cool
(06:11:26 PM) karenesq: I took a stab at building it from the 2010 release that chema put up
(06:12:07 PM) karenesq: sorry, should have said txenoo :)
(06:12:25 PM) bobert: I think it looks great so far
(06:12:26 PM) txenoo: it's the same :)
(06:12:33 PM) jrocha: I should be handling the content of the website the coming weeks
(06:13:09 PM) yippi [~bc99092@] entered the room.
(06:13:22 PM) txenoo: I'm working in having the quotes from the local team, it has been requested to the Faculty Dean too
(06:13:28 PM) yippi: another idea that has been suggested in the past has been to somehow reward sponsors that send a lot of people
(06:13:31 PM) jrocha: if the press release is the same, probably we should rewrite it so it doesn't look we have a script that updates the location and year only :)
(06:13:34 PM) bobert: Great!
(06:13:41 PM) karenesq: Please feel free to improve the press release, including my quote in it :)
(06:13:59 PM) bobert: yippi: While you were gone, we decided to move the sponsor discount discussion to the email list.
(06:14:08 PM) yippi: sounds good.
(06:14:14 PM) yippi: sorry, my network had a hiccup
(06:14:25 PM) williamfromtexas: link is here:
(06:14:34 PM) txenoo: karenesq: "sunny" is not the best adjective for Coruña ;-)
(06:14:37 PM) karenesq: jrocha: the first paragraph is the main part I left unchanged, but we can rewrite it
(06:14:51 PM) karenesq: txenoo: ha! ok, I pulled it from the bid materials
(06:14:52 PM) karenesq: :)
(06:15:15 PM) txenoo: but its only sunny in summer :)
(06:15:32 PM) jrocha: txenoo, it's in the sponsor brochure as well :D
(06:15:46 PM) karenesq: but we expect it will be sunny when we're there
(06:15:59 PM) jrocha: txenoo, it says it's guaranteed we have good weather in June or something like that :D
(06:16:07 PM) karenesq: heh
(06:16:12 PM) jrocha: karenesq, don't be too optimistic
(06:16:17 PM) jrocha: :)
(06:16:28 PM) jrocha: karenesq, it rains as twice as in London, here.
(06:16:28 PM) bobert: Hmmm... Do you often have bad weather at the end of July?
(06:16:55 PM) jrocha: bobert, with the global warming it's becoming "better"
(06:17:05 PM) txenoo: for the press release we need to have available the website
(06:17:15 PM) jrocha: but don't be afraid, folks.
(06:17:28 PM) jrocha: it's a nice city regardless of the weather :D
(06:17:33 PM) txenoo: we have prepared a drupal instance in our machines, 
(06:17:34 PM) bobert: :-)
(06:17:52 PM) bobert: Excellent!
(06:18:07 PM) txenoo: the dns was updated this morning so i don't know if it is available for you now.
(06:18:22 PM) jrocha: txenoo, I can help prepare a simple design with a local-ish theme
(06:18:40 PM) bobert: Let's go ahead and work on the text of the press release and review it again at the next meeting in two weeks.
(06:18:40 PM) jrocha: txenoo, like The Hague's silhouette thing
(06:18:42 PM) txenoo: jrocha: that's the next step
(06:18:47 PM) williamfromtexas: excellent
(06:18:54 PM) jrocha: guys one question about the design
(06:19:04 PM) karenesq: does "beautiful" work instead of "sunny"?
(06:19:15 PM) williamfromtexas: maybe we can put the working sponsor text on there when it's live, so this will be one of the first things people can find out about from the site
(06:19:19 PM) jrocha: The Hague's GUADEC had some funky logo AFAIR
(06:20:27 PM) bobert: Speaking of web site, is there any news on the domain or the guadec-planning list?
(06:20:31 PM) williamfromtexas: the sea is there, and in june people can go swimming? so maybe some water as part of the logo design?
(06:20:33 PM) jrocha: is there someone in charge of designing these logos for GUADEC or should we just tweak the usual one (my memory recalls some more generic one for Istanbul's GUADEC)
(06:21:05 PM) jrocha: williamfromtexas, the water's temperature is not exactly warm :)
(06:21:29 PM) williamfromtexas: i think something more iconic of the location is needed.. the gnome foot + something
(06:21:40 PM) jrocha: williamfromtexas, ok
(06:21:43 PM) jrocha: we got some local icons here
(06:21:49 PM) bobert: Ah - isn't there an old roman tower?
(06:21:51 PM) txenoo: bobert: regarding guadec-planning no news
(06:21:55 PM) williamfromtexas: it won't be sunny? maybe a shining sun on the big gnome toe
(06:21:57 PM) jrocha: bobert, exactly
(06:22:03 PM) txenoo: bobert: 
(06:22:42 PM) jrocha: williamfromtexas, I'll think of something
(06:22:50 PM) williamfromtexas: maybe roman lighthouse tower with a shining light, calling ppl to guadec?
(06:23:00 PM) txenoo: I received the answer to contact to Olav Vitters, but i didn't receive any answer
(06:23:09 PM) andreasn: the guadec logo with the squares is not really my favourite, but I prefer that over something odd done to the GNOME logo :)
(06:23:42 PM) txenoo: bobert: I think we could forget about guadec planing and create in an hour a guadec-planning at GPUL's mailman 
(06:24:01 PM) bobert: txenoo: That sounds like a great idea to me.
(06:24:57 PM) bobert: My biggest concern is getting control of the domain
(06:25:39 PM) jrocha: we should also think about having a Twitter/ account
(06:25:45 PM) bobert: Great idea!
(06:25:57 PM) jrocha: probably an official account for official announcements
(06:26:05 PM) williamfromtexas: agreed
(06:26:19 PM) williamfromtexas: and on the website an announcement blog that pushes to the planet.gnome
(06:26:22 PM) txenoo: bobert: i found at "ChristerEdwards, OwenTaylor and StormyPeters have access to update the registrar information. "
(06:26:49 PM) jrocha: or is there already a @guadec official one we could reuse, so people don't have to follow new twitter accounts year after year?
(06:27:39 PM) txenoo: I'm going to submit a new bug to point to or machine, and when we are prepared for publishing it openly request the change of
(06:27:40 PM) jrocha: it seems there is a @guadec
(06:27:40 PM) jrocha:!/guadec
(06:27:44 PM) bobert: txenoo: Hmmm. Looks like ChristerEdwards would be the first person to contact.
(06:28:16 PM) jrocha: if we knew who has it, we could use it and change the page's theme
(06:29:10 PM) williamfromtexas: haha that's me
(06:29:36 PM) williamfromtexas: i cleaned my cookies, i'm searching for the password
(06:29:38 PM) bobert: Heh! ;) 
(06:29:41 PM) jrocha: williamfromtexas, you're the one that has the twitter account?
(06:30:09 PM) williamfromtexas: twitter and identica. identica pushes to twitter
(06:30:49 PM) jrocha: cool
(06:31:25 PM) jrocha: williamfromtexas, once we get a logo + theme we could change twitter's page and subtitles to match this year's guadec, what do you think?
(06:32:35 PM) williamfromtexas: it works :)
(06:32:49 PM) bobert: That sounds like a good idea to me, and we could use that for the sponsor brochure and the web site too.
(06:33:08 PM) jrocha: okay
(06:33:08 PM) bobert: Who wants to take the action item to determine the logo and theme?
(06:34:01 PM) txenoo: some help from marketing team ?
(06:34:01 PM) karenesq: I actually have to run to a doctor's appointment
(06:34:10 PM) karenesq: sorry to leave mid-meeting!
(06:34:15 PM) williamfromtexas: someone with some design sense, pls, in this respect i am blind
(06:34:25 PM) bobert: karenesq: No problem!
(06:34:28 PM) txenoo:
(06:34:32 PM) williamfromtexas: thx karen, ciao
(06:34:34 PM) txenoo: this was our previous logo
(06:34:42 PM) jrocha: I can do something about the design but surely there are people more skilled in the design team
(06:34:55 PM) msanchez: I'm more than blind on that regard too... +1 to asking the desing team about it
(06:35:17 PM) bobert: I've sent an email to the marketing team asking for assistance, but there's been no response so far.
(06:35:38 PM) karenesq left the room (quit: Leaving).
(06:35:55 PM) msanchez: I have to leave now as well, btw... sorry about that too
(06:35:58 PM) bobert: jrocha: Is the design team part of the local team?
(06:36:06 PM) msanchez: will check minutes later, and our local redmine in GPUL too
(06:36:15 PM) bobert: I need to leave in about ten minutes, too.
(06:36:39 PM) williamfromtexas: i can check in the 2010 and 2011 logs to see if there was any designer active that we can approach directly?
(06:36:52 PM) bobert: That sounds like a great idea
(06:36:53 PM) msanchez: sorry then
(06:36:56 PM) msanchez: see you guys!
(06:36:57 PM) msanchez left the room (quit: Ex-Chat).
(06:37:37 PM) jrocha: williamfromtexas, good idea
(06:38:06 PM) jrocha: bobert, by design team, I assume everyone is talking about GNOME's design team, not our local organization team
(06:38:49 PM) williamfromtexas: ok, for sure i am in control of twitter and identica.!/guadec
(06:39:12 PM) williamfromtexas: let me know if i should be posting something :)
(06:39:17 PM) txenoo: In 2010 Scribus was used to compose the sponsors brochure
(06:39:33 PM) txenoo: having the editable document would be nice
(06:39:42 PM) txenoo: or for any previous year
(06:40:58 PM) bobert: I need to leave in about five minutes.
(06:41:16 PM) bobert: Are there any other urgent items we need to discuss?
(06:41:20 PM) jrocha: I think we should end the meeting very soon because people need to leave and I do too
(06:42:05 PM) txenoo: No
(06:42:32 PM) bobert: Okay, good! Thank you all for joining us today. I think it's been a very productive meeting.
(06:43:58 PM) williamfromtexas: cool!
(06:44:17 PM) bobert: See you in two weeks!
(06:44:31 PM) williamfromtexas: i'm interested to hear when the guadec-planning mailing list is online, a lot more will get done in the mid-weeks i think
(06:44:41 PM) williamfromtexas: thx all :) 
(06:45:24 PM) jrocha: okay folks, cheers and good bye
txenoo: williamfromtexas: i just sent an email to create it 
[09:48am] txenoo: probably tomorrow it will be available
[09:48am] yippi left the chat room. (Leaving)
[09:50am] williamfromtexas: txenoo: coolio! talk to you tomorrow 
[09:50am] williamfromtexas left the chat room.
[09:55am] txenoo:
[09:55am] txenoo: I've found the GUADEC 2010 silver sponsors
[09:55am] txenoo: it seems that there where only silver sponsors

GUADEC/2012/Minutes/2011-11-07 (last edited 2013-07-08 18:51:04 by EkaterinaGerasimova)