[Ambassadors] Thoughts on future FADNA gatherings

[Brian Powell]

On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:46 PM, David Nalley <david at gnsa.us> wrote:
> Inline reply
>
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:07 PM, Clint Savage <herlo1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Jon Stanley <jonstanley at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2008/11/26 Larry Cafiero <larry.cafiero at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> forth from East to West every year -- that would more than likely allow me
>>>> to attend (at least those closer to me).
>>>
>>> Has anyone thought about holding a FADNA in conjunction with SCALE 7x?
>>
>
> That idea has indeed come up.
>
>> As the event owner for SCaLE and have constantly been in discussions
>> about this issue, I will happily speak to this issue.  In my opinion,
>> holding FAD NA with another event will diminish the benefits of the
>> FAD.  I don't care if it's FUDCon in Boston or SCaLE in Los Angeles,
>> the problem still remains.  There isn't enough time to have both an
>> convention and the Fedora Ambassador Day at the same time.
>>
>> There are several reasons for this, but let me lay out a few of the
>> stumbling blocks here so we can all discuss this directly.
>>
>> Holding a FAD along with an event isn't inherently a bad idea.
>> However, because most folks going to SCaLE or FUDCon are there to
>> focus on those events and not a FAD, the FAD will be reduced in time.
>> While I enjoyed the first FADNA, I think it should be longer, probably
>> closer to 8 hours with fun events surrounding a weekend.
>
> Yes, but there is also the side effect that we simply have so much
> more potential en masse at an event. Yes, it's not as effective of a
> FAD, because the hours at the con are so exhausting. That said, using
> OLF as the example, we were incredibly effective - I am still getting
> emails from people a month and a half after the conference. The ROI
> for OLF was incredible in my mind because there were so many of us
> there.
>
> However I think we are really missing the point of what FAD is about,
> though it is something that you (Clint) pointed out. at FAD. The
> biggest benefit in my mind wasn't the 1/2 day 'strategizing' we did
> after OLF, rather it was the in person building relationships and
> espirit de corps building' (I hate that phrase). The contents of the
> FADNA meeting was ok, but we could have done the same during several
> IRC meetings. Honestly I felt OLF, dinner, and the late night hackfest
> were the most profitable 'FADNA' moments. Making a FADNA at an event
> also allows for us to do some OJT mentoring.
>
>>
>> Holding a FAD on its own also comes with struggles.  The main point
>> that has been argued is that the cost rises for Ambassadors who wish
>> to attend both events.  This is completely true.  For me, the decision
>> between a SCaLE and a FAD would be very difficult indeed, but I think
>> the consensus has been to recommend the convention over the FAD event.
>>
>
> So perhaps one of the possibilities is that their is more significant
> funding. It looks like the most recent FAD in EMEA had around 3500
> available. Looking at this from a per person budget there was around
> 5x the amount per person at FAD EMEA. Note to FAmSCo members: This is
> NOT a complaint. FADNA suffered from a number of problems including
> our lateness in getting the event scheduled (after budget deadline
> even) We (or at least I) am thrilled that we had any budget at all.
>
>
>> There are other arguments for and against holding a FAD with a
>> convention and I can see the value in both.  I find that the biggest
>> problem is that it's hard to have everyone agree on something like
>> this.
>
> The real thing is that this needs a person to 'own' the event. Jeffrey
> Tadlock really started and ran with FUDCon - and then when things at
> OLF really picked up he started delegating. All of this discussion is
> really sematics unless we have competing 'owners' for the next FADNA.
> IMO.
>
>
>>
>> I suggest alternating FADs between being along side an event and then
>> being a standalone event, maybe that will accommodate everyone's
>> desires.  I also suggest that we have two FADs a year, something like
>> March & September.  This would possibly accommodate a FAD attached to
>> either SCaLE (spring) or Ohio Linux Fest (Fall).
>>
>> There is much more I could say and have said in IRC.  I think this
>> pretty much sums that up, so I ask, what do you all think?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Clint
>>
>> --
>> Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list
>> Fedora-ambassadors-list at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ambassadors-list
>>
>
> --
> Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list
> Fedora-ambassadors-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ambassadors-list
>

My biggest issue is this, I have a certain amount of vacation and
funds allocated throughout the year for Fedora / Linux and Family
events. By having FAD along side events, this eases the burden a bit
if I already plan on attending that event to begin with. If FAD is
held on it's own then I am more than likely left with the choice of
either skipping an event I was planning on attending so I can go to
FAD or vice versa.

To be quite honest I am trying to stick to the East Coast events as
much as possible this coming year due to a variety of reasons, but the
biggest being lack of funds for travel and other expenses to be able
to come to the West Coast. I realize the same may be true for those on
the West Coast as well.

So the suggestion I have is you cover both. Have 2 FAD's a year, one
on the West Coast and one on the East Coast and simply stream and
conference call the meeting like we did at OLF. That way those that
can not attend one or the other can still participate without
physically attending.

-- 
Regards,

BrianPowell
http://fedoraproject.org
http://wnylug.org