[Social Media] Last call for FLOCK bids

[Justin W. Flory]

Hey all,

I noticed recently that the "Last call for FLOCK bids" article didn't 
get many views and it is sort of buried under the Election interviews on 
the CommBlog. Might be a good idea to highlight this article to get some 
more eyes on this topic and potentially bring some more ideas to the 
table about a location in EMEA for Flock 2016.

     https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/last-call-bids-for-flock-2016/

-- 
Cheers,
Justin W. Flory
jflory7(a)gmail.com

[Paul W. Frields]

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 01:45:04PM -0500, Justin W. Flory wrote:
>  Hey all,
>  
>  I noticed recently that the "Last call for FLOCK bids" article didn't get
>  many views and it is sort of buried under the Election interviews on the
>  CommBlog. Might be a good idea to highlight this article to get some more
>  eyes on this topic and potentially bring some more ideas to the table about
>  a location in EMEA for Flock 2016.
>  
>      https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/last-call-bids-for-flock-2016/ 
So the first "last call" was some time ago.  There are current bids as
indicated in the article as well.  It seems disingenuous to send it
out even further without giving folks an idea what the new bidders
should be concentrating on that wasn't there in the previous bids.
However, I don't want to put anyone on the spot.  Is there something
we can highlight appropriately?  (This is probably a question for
CommOps and the Flock team.)

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
    The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com

[Matthew Miller]

On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 08:58:28AM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>  So the first "last call" was some time ago.  There are
> current bids as
>  indicated in the article as well.  It seems disingenuous to send it
>  out even further without giving folks an idea what the new bidders
>  should be concentrating on that wasn't there in the previous bids.
>  However, I don't want to put anyone on the spot.  Is there something
>  we can highlight appropriately?  (This is probably a question for
>  CommOps and the Flock team.) 
AFAIK, it's down to cost. We need somewhere where a) the venue is
affordable and b) flights are cheap (the benchline is round-trip from
BOS, RDU, BOM, CDG, and PRG).

Based on experience in Rochester, it's also ideal if the venue _is_ the
hotel. (As I understand it, in that case, the venue was actually
_included_ when we booked enough rooms; I don't know if that can be
duplicated in Europe.)

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
Fedora Project Leader

[Remy DeCausemaker]

On Dec 4, 2015 9:57 AM, "Matthew Miller" <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
wrote:
>  On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 08:58:28AM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>  > So the first "last call" was some time ago.  There are current bids as
>  > indicated in the article as well.  It seems disingenuous to send it
>  > out even further without giving folks an idea what the new bidders
>  > should be concentrating on that wasn't there in the previous bids.
>  > However, I don't want to put anyone on the spot.  Is there something
>  > we can highlight appropriately?  (This is probably a question for
>  > CommOps and the Flock team.)
>
>  AFAIK, it's down to cost. We need somewhere where a) the venue is
>  affordable and b) flights are cheap (the benchline is round-trip from
>  BOS, RDU, BOM, CDG, and PRG).
>
>  Based on experience in Rochester, it's also ideal if the venue _is_ the
>  hotel. (As I understand it, in that case, the venue was actually
>  _included_ when we booked enough rooms; I don't know if that can be
>  duplicated in Europe.) 
To my understanding, this is all accurate, yes.
--RemyD.

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On 4 December 2015 at 07:57, Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 08:58:28AM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > So the first "last call" was some time ago.  There are current bids as
> > indicated in the article as well.  It seems disingenuous to send it
> > out even further without giving folks an idea what the new bidders
> > should be concentrating on that wasn't there in the previous bids.
> > However, I don't want to put anyone on the spot.  Is there something
> > we can highlight appropriately?  (This is probably a question for
> > CommOps and the Flock team.)
>
>  AFAIK, it's down to cost. We need somewhere where a) the venue is
>  affordable and b) flights are cheap (the benchline is round-trip from
>  BOS, RDU, BOM, CDG, and PRG).
>  
One of the problems is that I don't see what is considered an
affordable cost. Is that given to people when they are looking up
costs so they can see if they can shoot for it?

>  Based on experience in Rochester, it's also ideal if the venue
> _is_ the
>  hotel. (As I understand it, in that case, the venue was actually
>  _included_ when we booked enough rooms; I don't know if that can be
>  duplicated in Europe.)
>
>  --
>  Matthew Miller
>  <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
>  Fedora Project Leader
>  --
>  marketing mailing list
>  marketing(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  List info or to change your subscription:
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing 


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.

[Justin W. Flory]

On 12/04/2015 08:58 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>  So the first "last call" was some time ago.  There are
> current bids as
>  indicated in the article as well.  It seems disingenuous to send it
>  out even further without giving folks an idea what the new bidders
>  should be concentrating on that wasn't there in the previous bids.
>  However, I don't want to put anyone on the spot.  Is there something
>  we can highlight appropriately?  (This is probably a question for
>  CommOps and the Flock team.) 
My understanding about this article was that it was supposed to be a 
call for bids to bring to the drawing board. I believe both of the 
French locations had been ruled out due to budget constraints, and there 
is currently an (unfinished) proposal for Vienna. I know that some 
mentioned the possibility of doing a second year in the US.

Perhaps the article should be edited to make this clear? When I 
originally wrote it, I was trying to focus on just encouraging others to 
write more bids, but if it might be better to express the urgency of 
needing more bids, it might be good to fact check and then pop those in 
there, and then shoot it out on the channels.

This was why I thought it might be good to shoot out over social media 
channels - it seems like EMEA could use some more Flock bids if it will 
be held over there in 2016. I'm not sure when the actual deadline date 
is as of this moment.

--
Cheers,
Justin W. Flory
jflory7(a)gmail.com

[commops]Re: [Social Media] Last call for FLOCK bids

[Remy DeCausemaker]

On Dec 4, 2015 14:46, "Justin W. Flory" <jflory7(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On 12/04/2015 08:58 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> >
> > So the first "last call" was some time ago.  There are current bids as
> > indicated in the article as well.  It seems disingenuous to send it
> > out even further without giving folks an idea what the new bidders
> > should be concentrating on that wasn't there in the previous bids.
> > However, I don't want to put anyone on the spot.  Is there something
> > we can highlight appropriately?  (This is probably a question for
> > CommOps and the Flock team.) 
The reasoning for another call for bids was previous 2016 bids were either
over budget, or incomplete.

Based on feedback from last year, attendees really appreciated the hotel
and conference venue being in the same place, so that would strengthen any
future bids structured this way.

>  My understanding about this article was that it was supposed to be a call 
for bids
to bring to the drawing board. I believe both of the French
locations had been ruled out due to budget constraints, and there is
currently an (unfinished) proposal for Vienna. I know that some mentioned
the possibility of doing a second year in the US.

Only as a last resort will we ask for NA bids. Hopefully it doesn't come to
that.

>  Perhaps the article should be edited to make this clear? When I 
originally wrote
it, I was trying to focus on just encouraging others to
write more bids, but if it might be better to express the urgency of
needing more bids, it might be good to fact check and then pop those in
there, and then shoot it out on the channels.
>  This was why I thought it might be good to shoot out over social media 
channels -
it seems like EMEA could use some more Flock bids if it will be
held over there in 2016. I'm not sure when the actual deadline date is as
of this moment.

Actual deadline is asap. As soon as we settle on the messaging in the
article (which is already published, but not promoted) we should push it
out via social media channels.

HTH,
--RemyD.