Member/Board Interactivity (was: Re: [Members] DRAFT airlie)

[Jim Gettys]

On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 13:25 +0200, Egbert Eich wrote:
> Now this is the complete answer.
> 
> Matthew Rubenstein writes:
>  > 	These issues indicate a broader process problem limiting the current
>  > Foundation operations. X.org has members, a board/chief, sponsors, and a
>  > budget. None of them are being used to their maximum capacity (or near
>  > it). The solution of course is the board planning more Foundation
>  > activities for members (and associates), then spending budget on those
>  > activities. Which in turn will help the Foundation raise even more
>  > money, on the strength of productive activities rather than the
>  > potential of the organization.
> 
> The Board would not be able to plan those activeties nor should it.
> The Board should encourage people from within the community to take
> charge and organize events while the Board is offering support.
> This can be financial support but it may also act as a door opener
> or a contact establisher.
> 
> In the past the argument for attending industry events was to 
> be able meet decision makers there to increase our sponsorship.
> While I'm still in doubt that it is likely to be able to talk
> to these decision makers without prior appointment I always felt
> that spending sponsored money to get more money is an end in
> itself.

The real decision makers, at least in larger companies participating in
trade show events, are generally 150% booked from what I've seen, when I
used to be on the industry side of the fence. They seldom if ever have
the opportunity to "walk the show floor", and if they do, it will be to
very specific booths scouted in advance by their staff.

I would like someone to show an example where such attendance at such a
show has been productive in terms of X.Org sponsorship.

On a similar note, here is a question to our current sponsors: has
attendance at a trade show by X.org been of benefit to you? If so, how?
And could the same functions be served as well at developer oriented
meetings?

This is another side of the same coin. This (possible) benefit of X.Org
attendance at trade shows should be weighed against the clear benefit
that the sponsors are getting by the developer oriented meetings (which
also take time and effort by our people to organize and attend).  I note
the serious corporate sponsorship of events like the Linux Kernel
Summit, Linux Conf Australia and the GUADEC as models; it is clearly of
great benefit to those companies. And there are outreach opportunities
in each case associated with the primary developer events, by explicit
arrangement *adjacent* to other events (OLS, or outreach days next to
the main developer's event).

>  The community could help on most of these things. Maybe we should
>   establish working groups which people with interest to help can
>   join and offer their help.

Working Groups?  How about people who are interested "do it"?  And a
simple funding mechanism where people doing something can ask the board
for funds to be dispensed.

Working groups are only needed for large, long term activities involving
many people.

I don't think they can/should be established in advance of a clear-cut
need (e.g. a large developer's meeting).

                                          - Jim

-- 
Jim Gettys
One Laptop Per Child