On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> I'm not sure the sequential numbering makes the most sense. If
> Fudcon's start happening in rather diverse places around the year...
> even if its just 4 of them a year which could happen.. its going to
> get confusing. Especially if fudcons are sort of repeating events for
> a geographical region. You will probably find that it makes sense to
> make each event lean in focus towards areas of interest for
> subprojects in the Fedora umbrella where local leadership is present
> to guide discussion. Does it make sense to have a focus on "desktop"
> for each geographical area.. can you get a desktop project "leader" to
> each one of them?
<snip more good points>
For right now, the organization and planning for FUDCons is highly
centralized. This means that we can only hold so many, and in that
context, I think that numbering sequentially continues to make the most
sense.
Now, if this concept evolves in a scalable way, and if we should become
capable of putting on many FUDCons over a geographically dispersed area --
and honestly, the prospect of "franchising" FUDCons is *very* interesting
to me -- then I think you're absolutely right.
And what do I mean by "franchising" FUDCon? Maybe a good deliverable of
this group is the "Guide to holding your own FUDCon", with a repository of
canned presentations that clueful people can deliver to fill out a show,
and this group acting as the advisory board to folks who want to do that.
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________
Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the
Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the
] [ dumb. --mcluhan
