[Ambassadors] calling for backup

[Chris Tyler]

On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 09:57 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: 
> > [0] and if there was a portion of the bill someone else wanted to pick 
> > up - for instance, I recall OLPC sponsored... I think it was FUDPub, 
> > back in the January 2009 FUDCon in Boston - there's no "internal Red 
> > Hat" stuff needed at all.
> 
> We should continue to look for sponsorship opportunities for FUDCon
> where we can do similar partnerships.  Those sponsorships increase
> when FUDCon results in some tangible gain, be it code or otherwise,
> that's of interest to a sponsor.  If the planning group for a FUDCon
> event builds an objective for something deliverable like that, the
> potential's much greater for substantial sponsorship.

I wonder if the community doesn't really see much of a difference
between sponsored and non-sponsored -- for example, all of the recent
FUDCons have had FUDPubs, so there's little visible difference if the
FUDPub is sponsored by another party or not (it doesn't "alter the
experience" from an attendee point of view). If the FUDPub is sponsored,
then obviously Fedora is able to do other things such as sponsor more
people to travel to FUDCon or to old additional FADs, but these are not
highly visible or obvious consequences of the sponsorship.

I wonder if sponsorship would be more successful -- that is, more
attractive to sponsors -- if it had a more-visible impact on the event?

-Chris