Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

Till Adams-3
Dear CC!

We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:

The draft RfP is
at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing

Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
and comment.

I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
(14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.

Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
improvements on this document!

Till
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

guidos
FYI - I added some edits and comments. 

Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared proposal in the competitive bid.

Does anyone have an objection to this?

Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear CC!

We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:

The draft RfP is
at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing

Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
and comment.

I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
(14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.

Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
improvements on this document!

Till
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

stevenfeldman
No objection but it makes a little more work for the chair
______
Steven


On 12 Sep 2018, at 16:04, Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:

FYI - I added some edits and comments. 

Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared proposal in the competitive bid.

Does anyone have an objection to this?

Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear CC!

We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:

The draft RfP is
at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing

Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
and comment.

I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
(14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.

Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
improvements on this document!

Till
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

Mark Iliffe-2
Thanks for this all. I've added a section regarding commitment to diversity and inclusion, with the addition of whether LGBTQ+/other groups are legally discriminated against with the country- this is considering the experience of the Dar team and efforts that we went to. 

On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 11:06, Steven Feldman <[hidden email]> wrote:
No objection but it makes a little more work for the chair
______
Steven


On 12 Sep 2018, at 16:04, Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:

FYI - I added some edits and comments. 

Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared proposal in the competitive bid.

Does anyone have an objection to this?

Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear CC!

We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:

The draft RfP is
at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing

Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
and comment.

I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
(14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.

Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
improvements on this document!

Till
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

guidos
I would be happy to work on setting up a location where the files can be placed. If possible, I would make it so that when the file is posted an email goes out to the conference list and the conference committee would have access to the files.

-Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:00 PM Mark Iliffe <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thanks for this all. I've added a section regarding commitment to diversity and inclusion, with the addition of whether LGBTQ+/other groups are legally discriminated against with the country- this is considering the experience of the Dar team and efforts that we went to. 

On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 11:06, Steven Feldman <[hidden email]> wrote:
No objection but it makes a little more work for the chair
______
Steven


On 12 Sep 2018, at 16:04, Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:

FYI - I added some edits and comments. 

Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared proposal in the competitive bid.

Does anyone have an objection to this?

Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear CC!

We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:

The draft RfP is
at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing

Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
and comment.

I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
(14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.

Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
improvements on this document!

Till
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

delawen
Hi,

Added some more comments to the RFP.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 8:49 PM Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I would be happy to work on setting up a location where the files can be placed. If possible, I would make it so that when the file is posted an email goes out to the conference list and the conference committee would have access to the files.
>
> -Guido
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:00 PM Mark Iliffe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for this all. I've added a section regarding commitment to diversity and inclusion, with the addition of whether LGBTQ+/other groups are legally discriminated against with the country- this is considering the experience of the Dar team and efforts that we went to.
>>
>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 11:06, Steven Feldman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> No objection but it makes a little more work for the chair
>>> ______
>>> Steven
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12 Sep 2018, at 16:04, Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> FYI - I added some edits and comments.
>>>
>>> Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared proposal in the competitive bid.
>>>
>>> Does anyone have an objection to this?
>>>
>>> Guido
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear CC!
>>>>
>>>> We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:
>>>>
>>>> The draft RfP is
>>>> at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>
>>>> Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
>>>> and comment.
>>>>
>>>> I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
>>>> past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
>>>> (14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
>>>> we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.
>>>>
>>>> Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
>>>> improvements on this document!
>>>>
>>>> Till
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

Till Adams-3
In reply to this post by stevenfeldman
Guido,

Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared proposal in the competitive bid.


the 2 times I was involved, we had once only 1 proposal, for 2019 the proposals came in within the last 2 hours of the period. So this was no issue, but I see your point.

In order to keep this fair also, we might have two people out of CC who receive the proposals and these 2 have the duty to release them on the list when the proposal period ends. As chair, I can be one of these two.

Till



Does anyone have an objection to this?

Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear CC!

We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:

The draft RfP is
at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing

Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
and comment.

I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
(14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.

Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
improvements on this document!

Till
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

stevenfeldman
In reply to this post by delawen
I have worked through the comments and suggested changes to the RfP and accepted most and commented back on others. I have taken some exec/personal decisions on this doc to try and get it finished, apologies if I have misinterpreted your wishes.

Main items outstanding:

  1. Blind submission of proposals. This doesn’t need to be in the RfP doc - we can decide to implement the process later and notify when we start stage 2
  2. We need to agree the length and positioning of the AGM relative to other activity. I think a mandatory 2 hour AGM with no other activities running in parallel is too long. Either keep to 1 hour and run straight after the plenary session on day 2 or run for 2 hours but allow other activities in parallel.
    Personally I find the long series of slides and speakers on every chapter and project tedious, the AGM needs to be more focussed and punchy and reaching out to both existing and potential members.
    The Annual Report should be published as a slide deck or document for everyone to read regardless of whether they are at FOSS4G
  3. Are we going to run a member meeting as well as an AGM? If so is it a parallel session or a plenary type activity.
  4. I have tried to improve the Diversity and Inclusion section, are you happy with that?
  5. The section on video (and streaming) needs approval. It currently reads “Video - OSGeo may provide loan funding of up to $30,000 towards the cost of recording the conference proceedings. If there is surplus from the conference, OSGeo requires this funding to be repaid in full to OSGeo before any calculation and distribution of the conference surplus.” The important word is the “may” (Maria has OK’d and I have linked the requirement to the section on possible funding)

Nearly there

______
Steven


On 13 Sep 2018, at 07:25, María Arias de Reyna <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

Added some more comments to the RFP.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 8:49 PM Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:

I would be happy to work on setting up a location where the files can be placed. If possible, I would make it so that when the file is posted an email goes out to the conference list and the conference committee would have access to the files.

-Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:00 PM Mark Iliffe <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thanks for this all. I've added a section regarding commitment to diversity and inclusion, with the addition of whether LGBTQ+/other groups are legally discriminated against with the country- this is considering the experience of the Dar team and efforts that we went to.

On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 11:06, Steven Feldman <[hidden email]> wrote:

No objection but it makes a little more work for the chair
______
Steven


On 12 Sep 2018, at 16:04, Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:

FYI - I added some edits and comments.

Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared proposal in the competitive bid.

Does anyone have an objection to this?

Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear CC!

We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:

The draft RfP is
at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing

Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
and comment.

I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
(14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.

Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
improvements on this document!

Till
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

Cameron Shorter

Some comments added, in particular, suggest we request:

"Comment on alignment of local laws and customs in relation to the Code of Conduct."

This was a potential issue with our last conference hosting country.


On 13/9/18 7:59 pm, Steven Feldman wrote:
I have worked through the comments and suggested changes to the RfP and accepted most and commented back on others. I have taken some exec/personal decisions on this doc to try and get it finished, apologies if I have misinterpreted your wishes.

Main items outstanding:

  1. Blind submission of proposals. This doesn’t need to be in the RfP doc - we can decide to implement the process later and notify when we start stage 2
  2. We need to agree the length and positioning of the AGM relative to other activity. I think a mandatory 2 hour AGM with no other activities running in parallel is too long. Either keep to 1 hour and run straight after the plenary session on day 2 or run for 2 hours but allow other activities in parallel.
    Personally I find the long series of slides and speakers on every chapter and project tedious, the AGM needs to be more focussed and punchy and reaching out to both existing and potential members.
    The Annual Report should be published as a slide deck or document for everyone to read regardless of whether they are at FOSS4G
  3. Are we going to run a member meeting as well as an AGM? If so is it a parallel session or a plenary type activity.
  4. I have tried to improve the Diversity and Inclusion section, are you happy with that?
  5. The section on video (and streaming) needs approval. It currently reads “Video - OSGeo may provide loan funding of up to $30,000 towards the cost of recording the conference proceedings. If there is surplus from the conference, OSGeo requires this funding to be repaid in full to OSGeo before any calculation and distribution of the conference surplus.” The important word is the “may” (Maria has OK’d and I have linked the requirement to the section on possible funding)
Nearly there

______
Steven


On 13 Sep 2018, at 07:25, María Arias de Reyna <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

Added some more comments to the RFP.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 8:49 PM Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:

I would be happy to work on setting up a location where the files can be placed. If possible, I would make it so that when the file is posted an email goes out to the conference list and the conference committee would have access to the files.

-Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:00 PM Mark Iliffe <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thanks for this all. I've added a section regarding commitment to diversity and inclusion, with the addition of whether LGBTQ+/other groups are legally discriminated against with the country- this is considering the experience of the Dar team and efforts that we went to.

On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 11:06, Steven Feldman <[hidden email]> wrote:

No objection but it makes a little more work for the chair
______
Steven


On 12 Sep 2018, at 16:04, Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:

FYI - I added some edits and comments.

Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared proposal in the competitive bid.

Does anyone have an objection to this?

Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear CC!

We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:

The draft RfP is
at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing

Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
and comment.

I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
(14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.

Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
improvements on this document!

Till
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

-- 
Cameron Shorter
Technology Demystifier
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant

M +61 (0) 419 142 254

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

Cameron Shorter

Thinking about this overnight, I realised that it is probably important to provide a freedom index to reference back to. I found this:

https://www.cato.org/human-freedom-index

I'd be happy to reference some other index if someone knows of one?


On 13/9/18 10:04 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:

Some comments added, in particular, suggest we request:

"Comment on alignment of local laws and customs in relation to the Code of Conduct."

This was a potential issue with our last conference hosting country.


On 13/9/18 7:59 pm, Steven Feldman wrote:
I have worked through the comments and suggested changes to the RfP and accepted most and commented back on others. I have taken some exec/personal decisions on this doc to try and get it finished, apologies if I have misinterpreted your wishes.

Main items outstanding:

  1. Blind submission of proposals. This doesn’t need to be in the RfP doc - we can decide to implement the process later and notify when we start stage 2
  2. We need to agree the length and positioning of the AGM relative to other activity. I think a mandatory 2 hour AGM with no other activities running in parallel is too long. Either keep to 1 hour and run straight after the plenary session on day 2 or run for 2 hours but allow other activities in parallel.
    Personally I find the long series of slides and speakers on every chapter and project tedious, the AGM needs to be more focussed and punchy and reaching out to both existing and potential members.
    The Annual Report should be published as a slide deck or document for everyone to read regardless of whether they are at FOSS4G
  3. Are we going to run a member meeting as well as an AGM? If so is it a parallel session or a plenary type activity.
  4. I have tried to improve the Diversity and Inclusion section, are you happy with that?
  5. The section on video (and streaming) needs approval. It currently reads “Video - OSGeo may provide loan funding of up to $30,000 towards the cost of recording the conference proceedings. If there is surplus from the conference, OSGeo requires this funding to be repaid in full to OSGeo before any calculation and distribution of the conference surplus.” The important word is the “may” (Maria has OK’d and I have linked the requirement to the section on possible funding)
Nearly there

______
Steven


On 13 Sep 2018, at 07:25, María Arias de Reyna <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

Added some more comments to the RFP.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 8:49 PM Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:

I would be happy to work on setting up a location where the files can be placed. If possible, I would make it so that when the file is posted an email goes out to the conference list and the conference committee would have access to the files.

-Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:00 PM Mark Iliffe <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thanks for this all. I've added a section regarding commitment to diversity and inclusion, with the addition of whether LGBTQ+/other groups are legally discriminated against with the country- this is considering the experience of the Dar team and efforts that we went to.

On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 11:06, Steven Feldman <[hidden email]> wrote:

No objection but it makes a little more work for the chair
______
Steven


On 12 Sep 2018, at 16:04, Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:

FYI - I added some edits and comments.

Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared proposal in the competitive bid.

Does anyone have an objection to this?

Guido

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear CC!

We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:

The draft RfP is
at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing

Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
and comment.

I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
(14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.

Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
improvements on this document!

Till
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

-- 
Cameron Shorter
Technology Demystifier
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant

M +61 (0) 419 142 254

-- 
Cameron Shorter
Technology Demystifier
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant

M +61 (0) 419 142 254

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

Eli Adam
In reply to this post by Till Adams-3
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Guido,
>
> Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think
> that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we
> are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for
> people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their
> competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared
> proposal in the competitive bid.
>

Sounds reasonable.  I think that the old method was a combination of
waiting until close to the deadline and thinking that if other LOCs
need to look at yours, they've got no chance anyway.

>
> the 2 times I was involved, we had once only 1 proposal, for 2019 the
> proposals came in within the last 2 hours of the period. So this was no
> issue, but I see your point.
>
> In order to keep this fair also, we might have two people out of CC who
> receive the proposals and these 2 have the duty to release them on the list
> when the proposal period ends. As chair, I can be one of these two.

I would still like to require that the LOCs email the list before the
deadline that they have turned in their proposals.  This ensures that
they are subscribed to the mailing list, who speaks for the LOC,
directs response questions and comments at them, etc.  It also lets
them set the subject line and otherwise establish the groundwork for
their bid.  It also publicly announces it before the deadline.  Then
you or any designated third party can reply with the attachment after
the deadline.


Best regards, Eli

>
> Till
>
>
>
> Does anyone have an objection to this?
>
> Guido
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear CC!
>>
>> We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:
>>
>> The draft RfP is
>> at
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
>> and comment.
>>
>> I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
>> past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
>> (14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
>> we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.
>>
>> Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
>> improvements on this document!
>>
>> Till
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

guidos
Good points,

I think announcement that the proposal has been submitted makes sense.

Guido

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018, 3:46 PM Eli Adam <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Guido,
>
> Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think
> that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we
> are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for
> people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their
> competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared
> proposal in the competitive bid.
>

Sounds reasonable.  I think that the old method was a combination of
waiting until close to the deadline and thinking that if other LOCs
need to look at yours, they've got no chance anyway.

>
> the 2 times I was involved, we had once only 1 proposal, for 2019 the
> proposals came in within the last 2 hours of the period. So this was no
> issue, but I see your point.
>
> In order to keep this fair also, we might have two people out of CC who
> receive the proposals and these 2 have the duty to release them on the list
> when the proposal period ends. As chair, I can be one of these two.

I would still like to require that the LOCs email the list before the
deadline that they have turned in their proposals.  This ensures that
they are subscribed to the mailing list, who speaks for the LOC,
directs response questions and comments at them, etc.  It also lets
them set the subject line and otherwise establish the groundwork for
their bid.  It also publicly announces it before the deadline.  Then
you or any designated third party can reply with the attachment after
the deadline.


Best regards, Eli

>
> Till
>
>
>
> Does anyone have an objection to this?
>
> Guido
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear CC!
>>
>> We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:
>>
>> The draft RfP is
>> at
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
>> and comment.
>>
>> I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
>> past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
>> (14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
>> we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.
>>
>> Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
>> improvements on this document!
>>
>> Till
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

michael terner-2
+1 

I like the notion of an "email announcement" to the list stating "we have submitted and are ready for the next phase of Q&A".

mt

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 2:41 PM Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:
Good points,

I think announcement that the proposal has been submitted makes sense.

Guido

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018, 3:46 PM Eli Adam <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Guido,
>
> Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think
> that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we
> are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for
> people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their
> competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared
> proposal in the competitive bid.
>

Sounds reasonable.  I think that the old method was a combination of
waiting until close to the deadline and thinking that if other LOCs
need to look at yours, they've got no chance anyway.

>
> the 2 times I was involved, we had once only 1 proposal, for 2019 the
> proposals came in within the last 2 hours of the period. So this was no
> issue, but I see your point.
>
> In order to keep this fair also, we might have two people out of CC who
> receive the proposals and these 2 have the duty to release them on the list
> when the proposal period ends. As chair, I can be one of these two.

I would still like to require that the LOCs email the list before the
deadline that they have turned in their proposals.  This ensures that
they are subscribed to the mailing list, who speaks for the LOC,
directs response questions and comments at them, etc.  It also lets
them set the subject line and otherwise establish the groundwork for
their bid.  It also publicly announces it before the deadline.  Then
you or any designated third party can reply with the attachment after
the deadline.


Best regards, Eli

>
> Till
>
>
>
> Does anyone have an objection to this?
>
> Guido
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear CC!
>>
>> We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:
>>
>> The draft RfP is
>> at
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
>> and comment.
>>
>> I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
>> past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
>> (14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
>> we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.
>>
>> Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
>> improvements on this document!
>>
>> Till
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


--
Michael Terner
(M) 978-631-6602

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

Till Adams-3

Folks,

if this is an issue, let's handle it like this:

- the bidding teams *can* send their proposal to me & someone else from CC (Guido? Michael?), if they want to get rid of it before the official deadline and if they fear publishing their proposal to the public earlier than other teams

  - in that case the bidder posts only a submission-note on the ML

  - if not, they are open to publish their proposal via the mailing list, just like it was the years before

This does not apply for LoI's.

Is that okay (I feel that we don't need a motion here)?

Till




Am 17.09.2018 um 11:30 schrieb michael terner:
+1 

I like the notion of an "email announcement" to the list stating "we have submitted and are ready for the next phase of Q&A".

mt

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 2:41 PM Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:
Good points,

I think announcement that the proposal has been submitted makes sense.

Guido

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018, 3:46 PM Eli Adam <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Guido,
>
> Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think
> that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we
> are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for
> people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their
> competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared
> proposal in the competitive bid.
>

Sounds reasonable.  I think that the old method was a combination of
waiting until close to the deadline and thinking that if other LOCs
need to look at yours, they've got no chance anyway.

>
> the 2 times I was involved, we had once only 1 proposal, for 2019 the
> proposals came in within the last 2 hours of the period. So this was no
> issue, but I see your point.
>
> In order to keep this fair also, we might have two people out of CC who
> receive the proposals and these 2 have the duty to release them on the list
> when the proposal period ends. As chair, I can be one of these two.

I would still like to require that the LOCs email the list before the
deadline that they have turned in their proposals.  This ensures that
they are subscribed to the mailing list, who speaks for the LOC,
directs response questions and comments at them, etc.  It also lets
them set the subject line and otherwise establish the groundwork for
their bid.  It also publicly announces it before the deadline.  Then
you or any designated third party can reply with the attachment after
the deadline.


Best regards, Eli

>
> Till
>
>
>
> Does anyone have an objection to this?
>
> Guido
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear CC!
>>
>> We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:
>>
>> The draft RfP is
>> at
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
>> and comment.
>>
>> I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
>> past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
>> (14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
>> we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.
>>
>> Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
>> improvements on this document!
>>
>> Till
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


--
Michael Terner
(M) 978-631-6602


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

delawen
Also remember that last time Bucharest had issues uploading to the
mailing list. So it is good if there is a backup CC email to send the
proposal.
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 12:21 PM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Folks,
>
> if this is an issue, let's handle it like this:
>
> - the bidding teams *can* send their proposal to me & someone else from CC (Guido? Michael?), if they want to get rid of it before the official deadline and if they fear publishing their proposal to the public earlier than other teams
>
>   - in that case the bidder posts only a submission-note on the ML
>
>   - if not, they are open to publish their proposal via the mailing list, just like it was the years before
>
> This does not apply for LoI's.
>
> Is that okay (I feel that we don't need a motion here)?
>
> Till
>
>
>
>
> Am 17.09.2018 um 11:30 schrieb michael terner:
>
> +1
>
> I like the notion of an "email announcement" to the list stating "we have submitted and are ready for the next phase of Q&A".
>
> mt
>
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 2:41 PM Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Good points,
>>
>> I think announcement that the proposal has been submitted makes sense.
>>
>> Guido
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018, 3:46 PM Eli Adam <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> > Guido,
>>> >
>>> > Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I think
>>> > that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until we
>>> > are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible for
>>> > people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their
>>> > competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared
>>> > proposal in the competitive bid.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Sounds reasonable.  I think that the old method was a combination of
>>> waiting until close to the deadline and thinking that if other LOCs
>>> need to look at yours, they've got no chance anyway.
>>>
>>> >
>>> > the 2 times I was involved, we had once only 1 proposal, for 2019 the
>>> > proposals came in within the last 2 hours of the period. So this was no
>>> > issue, but I see your point.
>>> >
>>> > In order to keep this fair also, we might have two people out of CC who
>>> > receive the proposals and these 2 have the duty to release them on the list
>>> > when the proposal period ends. As chair, I can be one of these two.
>>>
>>> I would still like to require that the LOCs email the list before the
>>> deadline that they have turned in their proposals.  This ensures that
>>> they are subscribed to the mailing list, who speaks for the LOC,
>>> directs response questions and comments at them, etc.  It also lets
>>> them set the subject line and otherwise establish the groundwork for
>>> their bid.  It also publicly announces it before the deadline.  Then
>>> you or any designated third party can reply with the attachment after
>>> the deadline.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Till
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Does anyone have an objection to this?
>>> >
>>> > Guido
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Dear CC!
>>> >>
>>> >> We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:
>>> >>
>>> >> The draft RfP is
>>> >> at
>>> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing
>>> >>
>>> >> Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
>>> >> and comment.
>>> >>
>>> >> I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
>>> >> past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
>>> >> (14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
>>> >> we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.
>>> >>
>>> >> Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
>>> >> improvements on this document!
>>> >>
>>> >> Till
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> >> [hidden email]
>>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Conference_dev mailing list
>>> > [hidden email]
>>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Conference_dev mailing list
>>> > [hidden email]
>>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
> --
> Michael Terner
> [hidden email]
> (M) 978-631-6602
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Draft RfP document FOSS4G 2020

Eli Adam
In reply to this post by Till Adams-3
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 3:21 AM, Till Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> if this is an issue, let's handle it like this:
>
> - the bidding teams *can* send their proposal to me & someone else from CC
> (Guido? Michael?), if they want to get rid of it before the official
> deadline and if they fear publishing their proposal to the public earlier
> than other teams
>
>   - in that case the bidder posts only a submission-note on the ML
>
>   - if not, they are open to publish their proposal via the mailing list,
> just like it was the years before
>
> This does not apply for LoI's.
>
> Is that okay (I feel that we don't need a motion here)?

Sounds good to me and well within the purview of the chair or anyone
running the RfP.

Eli

>
> Till
>
>
>
>
> Am 17.09.2018 um 11:30 schrieb michael terner:
>
> +1
>
> I like the notion of an "email announcement" to the list stating "we have
> submitted and are ready for the next phase of Q&A".
>
> mt
>
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 2:41 PM Guido Stein <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Good points,
>>
>> I think announcement that the proposal has been submitted makes sense.
>>
>> Guido
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018, 3:46 PM Eli Adam <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Till Adams <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Guido,
>>> >
>>> > Most importantly to me and perhaps should be discussed here is that I
>>> > think
>>> > that we should make the collection of the full proposals private until
>>> > we
>>> > are ready to release them all on the wiki. This would make it possible
>>> > for
>>> > people who turned their proposals early to feel secure that their
>>> > competitors are not using the information from their publicly shared
>>> > proposal in the competitive bid.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Sounds reasonable.  I think that the old method was a combination of
>>> waiting until close to the deadline and thinking that if other LOCs
>>> need to look at yours, they've got no chance anyway.
>>>
>>> >
>>> > the 2 times I was involved, we had once only 1 proposal, for 2019 the
>>> > proposals came in within the last 2 hours of the period. So this was no
>>> > issue, but I see your point.
>>> >
>>> > In order to keep this fair also, we might have two people out of CC who
>>> > receive the proposals and these 2 have the duty to release them on the
>>> > list
>>> > when the proposal period ends. As chair, I can be one of these two.
>>>
>>> I would still like to require that the LOCs email the list before the
>>> deadline that they have turned in their proposals.  This ensures that
>>> they are subscribed to the mailing list, who speaks for the LOC,
>>> directs response questions and comments at them, etc.  It also lets
>>> them set the subject line and otherwise establish the groundwork for
>>> their bid.  It also publicly announces it before the deadline.  Then
>>> you or any designated third party can reply with the attachment after
>>> the deadline.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Till
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Does anyone have an objection to this?
>>> >
>>> > Guido
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM Till Adams <[hidden email]>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Dear CC!
>>> >>
>>> >> We have a draft of the RfP document for the 2020 call now:
>>> >>
>>> >> The draft RfP is
>>> >> at
>>> >>
>>> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ltOnAoiFSTl7ERdlFKUvx-Jh9eDpVQgEn4AoCIp4SE/edit?usp=sharing
>>> >>
>>> >> Due to Steven, this is an open document, anyone with the link can view
>>> >> and comment.
>>> >>
>>> >> I know we are little late, but the document is based on the RfP of the
>>> >> past years. Feel free to comment on this document until *this* friday
>>> >> (14.09.2018) 12h CET, after that I will kick out the call for 2020 and
>>> >> we have to finalize the document and resolute all comments.
>>> >>
>>> >> Special thanks to Steven and Michael, who did the main work and
>>> >> improvements on this document!
>>> >>
>>> >> Till
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> >> [hidden email]
>>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Conference_dev mailing list
>>> > [hidden email]
>>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Conference_dev mailing list
>>> > [hidden email]
>>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
> --
> Michael Terner
> [hidden email]
> (M) 978-631-6602
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev