<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Serge Wroclawski wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:2475f0c30912030706l1393f248n84d91903c57edd81@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Richard Shank <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:develop@zestic.com"><develop@zestic.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I see from the notes that Charlotte suggested going into an area with an
established community. I would like to throw out the idea of the opposite
approach. It might help to jump start activity in an area that is currently
inactive by having the SOTM there.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Richard,
There are two major reasons for this as an included criteria.
The first reason is that by having an area with an existing OSM
community, US SOTM will attract locals. An area without a mapping
community may have interested parties (as you mention) but it would be
difficult to spread the word effectively.
The other reason is connected with the organizing team. A local
community would make it easier to create/maintain an effective
organizing team on the ground who is able to both plan the conference
(selecting a venue, selecting accommodations, etc.) and also be able
to effectively run the conference.
Without locals, finding volunteers to do this would be difficult,
especially as this is the first US SOTM conference.
In the end, if you feel strongly about it, I'd put your reasoning into
your proposal.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Serge,<br>
<br>
I don't have a strong feeling about it, it was more of just tossing an
idea out there. I completely understand what you are saying and I
would say that having a SOTM at a city without support should probably
wait until we get the first one under our belts. <br>
<br>
Richard<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>