[FAmSCo] Current Tasks

[Giannis Konstantinidis]

Hey Cristoph,

> 
>     On March 9, 2016 at 2:03 PM Christoph Wickert
> <christoph.wickert at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>     I think I have already elaborated my POV.
> 
>     If potty had not stepped down, I would have voted for him, which would
>     have changed the outcome of the election.
> 

Why didn't you do that, then?

> 
> 
>     AFAICS the budget was the blocker for both bids. We meanwhile have budgets
> at
>     https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon:Puno_2016#General_Budget and
>     https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon:Montevideo_2016_bid#Budget
> 
>     Montevideo seems way more expensive than Puno, but USD 9,000 out of
>     10,369 is for airfare, which is not taken into account in the Puno bit
>     at all., so it's hard to compare the bids.
> 
>     I think we need the event owners to clarify their numbers before we
>     can make a decision. It would be nice if they attended the FAmSCo
>     meeting in case there are further questions.
> 

It has already been decided for Puno. AFAIK lbazan and potty are either part of
the organizing team or they are at least well-connected to it.

> 
> 
>     The budget at
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon:Bid_for_PhnomPenh_2016#Budget_Planning
>     needs more work before we can pass this on to the Council.
> 
>     USD 17,180 is a little over the limit of USD 15,000 for an APAC
>     FUDCon. While this problem can be solved (additional budget,
>     sponsors), what really worries me is that is that there are hardly any
>     contributors in Phnom Penh, so most will have to be flown in. This is
>     where it really gets expensive. ATM only USD 6,000 are allocated for
>     airfare of 12 (!) people, but it will probably be way more people.
> 
>     AFAIK travel is an ongoing problem for the APAC FUDCons. How did we
>     solve the problem in the past?
> 

Gnokii has provided a few clarifications during the last meeting.

> 
> 
>     Is this a ticket for this? I only see
>     https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/359 but it seems to address a
>     different issue, namely mentors who want to step down (once and for
>     all).
> 

Based on that proposal, I believe that it would really make sense to open up a
greater discussion related to a) cleaning up inactive mentors (who are clearly
not interested in mentoring new ambassadors anymore) and b) having a new round
of mentor nominations.

Take care!
-Giannis


--
Giannis Konstantinidis

giannis at konstantinidis.cc
http://konstantinidis.cc
giannisk on irc.freenode.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/famsco/attachments/20160314/3a93eb8f/attachment-0001.html>