[EuroPython] How to decide locations in future

[Andy Robinson]

Martijn Faassen said:
> M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> Not if this is the way the organization makes decisions. The
> organization is in trouble if this turns into a common pattern.
>
I just tuned in after 2 days of transatlantic travel and am very sorry to
see this has got so messy.  But it's easy to see why with hindsight, and I
am sure there is a nice way out of it.

Nobody set out the decision making process for where to hold next year's
because, as we all know, nobody is in charge of the EuroPython
"organisation".   There was plenty of dscussion on locations in the
corridors and at least one attempt at a public decision, which is as good
as it can get in this situation.  So let's put all the blame on "nobody"
and concentrate on refining our procedure for next time.

The most helpful thing in promoting an event is a clear decision on dates
and location.    The best way to achieve this is to do it at each
conference.  So I suggest that in future, anyone wanting to "bid" starts
doing so on the list about 15 months before, and all candidates present
their case in a session before the keynote.  Then we have a show of hands.
 Others could vote by proxy on the list with a deadline of lunchtime that
day so there is time to count.  Whoever winds has a whole year to plan and
their advance publicity is already done.

A common topic in the corridors was 'where is next year'.  Tim asked for a
public show of hands (I think, I missed it).  Francis made a very strong
and reasoned case for keeping it where it is. Lots of people enjoy it in
Belgium and there is a precedent for having European institutions there.

I also believe Denis and friends deserve one more try, in which their own
business can get some payback (in terms of recognition as the primary
Python firm within Belgium, better-shared workload and maybe add-ons like
an industry day or tutorials to make them some money), and in which we can
all have a really smooth, optimal event with all the bugs worked out.

Going forward, I believe that contenders should launch their bids about 13
months out (plenty of time to discuss on the lists and get facts and
pictures on a web site), make a presentation for their own location before
the keynote, and decide it with a clear show of hands.

The only alternative I see is to try and appoint some NEUTRAL committee
who have no plans to host an event (I'll happily be on that) and let
contenders fly us out, wine us and dine us and bribe us like the Olympic
Committee.....

Also, since we are aiming for May 2003, what's wrong with having one in
Goteburg (*sorry about accents, on American internet PC) in say November
or December this year?   A smaller event six months out of phase is the
perfect way to make your case for a big one, and who knows, maybe it would
be just as big and we could have two?  I could definitely handle two such
events per year and see it as very good for the Python economy.

I will finish by saying that I felt something very exciting this year: 
there is a real Python 'economy' in Europe, with real firms and customers
making connections at EuroPython.  First time for me was fun but not
commercially justifiable; from now on I regard it as commercially
essential.  I would welcome anything up to 4 python events each year, in a
range of sizes, and as you know am trying to arrange one.  Let's have a
whole series in all locations and sizes...


Best Regards,

Andy Robinson