You may recall we recently designed and implemented a new governance model for FOSS4G NA. Thank you once again to the large team of people who participated in that.
Over the past weeks, we bootstrapped the model for FOSS4G NA 2016. We have created a RFP for venues to host the conference and received a great response. With much effort we were able to find two especially great options for the conference. They are the DoubleTree in downtown Philadelphia, and the convention center in downtown Raleigh.
We’d like to ask you where you’d like to go. Please take a moment to complete this short survey here:
I read a story about ipads crashing causing American Airlines pilots to be grounded. This reminded me about a topic I’ve been thinking & talking about lately.
The software and data underpinnings for much of modern society have evolved to be very complex. I can’t help but notice that this often makes modern life brittle. We depend on systems working well together and getting the right data at just the right time. When they don’t, we have a bad day.
In some cases it’s just inappropriate and ridiculous use of technology… why the heck does my fridge need internet access?! In many other cases, R&D is rushed, done poorly, and contributes to a more brittle world.
Rather than low acquisition costs (free as in a puppy!), here’s where I think the main advantage to open source resides. There’s nothing intrinsically more secure or robust about open source. However, if you can collaborate with others, and figure out common components that each of you can build upon, then it opens the door to a large and vibrant ecosystem of collaborators. Such a community enables sharing the costs, risks, and benefits from those components. As those components get more and more widely adopted, issues are more likely to be found and can be fixed quickly. This helps keep the forces compelling a brittle world at bay.
A little over a month ago, I posted to share details of an effort to create governance for how FOSS4G North America (NA) is run. The governance includes things like how the site & venue are selected, how the chair is selected, and how decisions are made.
On behalf of the team, we would encourage you to take a look. We’re hoping to resolve all feedback by end of today, April 29, 2015.
Huge gratitude to the large team of people who worked on this over the last month and a bit!
And please stay tuned regarding FOSS4G North America 2016… if all goes well, and our process works as well as we hope, there should be an announcement soon.
As a useful measure of ecosystem health, I consider hiring to be a good sign. There are currently 113+ open positions.
This was a very quick list, and I’d like to keep it up to date. If your company is hiring and I didn’t list it, please contact me at andrew dot ross at eclipse dot org and I’ll update my list. Thank you!
Also, if you’re currently looking for work, or considering a career change, please do reach out and I’ll do my best to help play matchmaker.
A few of the write-ups noted differences in the conference this year. I would like to add a bit. Deep gratitude to our organizing committee and program committee for the work they did, and for the feedback on this post.
One area we thought would increase the quality of the conference and our dialog there was to push for greater diversity in the conference. Technology events and especially open source technology events tend to be dominated by caucasian males. For instance, it is not unusual for a FOSS4G related event’s audience to be around 10% women.
A lot could be said about why this matters. Open communities are fuelled by ideas, energy, and contributions. Losing people’s participation needlessly really hurts. More importantly, women participating in an open community can be seen as an important health check. Strong participation could indicate that the community is reasonably welcoming to all. And no, the current lack of women participating is not because they aren’t interested in technology & engineering!
Explanations for why this happens are long and complex. To share a few quick thoughts, open source and open data communities experience strong forces to self-select. As more people with similar ideas get together, barriers can form against newcomers, particularly people with notable differences from the incumbent group. While the barrier often is not intentional, or even overt, it is definitely there. It’s also worse than just a barrier to getting started. It’s a constant drag to all participation. Sadly this frustrates and pushes good people away from the community.
How do you help? Well, first off, it is very hard to change a culture at all. It’s darned near impossible starting from a position of convincing people they’re wrong, bad, ignorant, etc. There are so many outstanding people in open groups doing what they feel is the right thing, and they are deeply passionate in that conviction. Convincing passionate people that they may be discouraging others often falls flat. Nevertheless, open communities can become toxic without even realizing it.
In the context of conferences, many other events have hosted panel discussions to talk about diversity. While I’m glad there’s something happening, I find these discussions by themselves to be a missed opportunity. Rather than inviting people to just talk about their sex, gender, race, etc. we felt something more could be accomplished.
Like most conference organizers, we wanted amazing speakers to talk about tackling important challenging problems. We also wanted to make sure a good proportion of speakers just happened to be women. We were willing to do hard work to make it so, and that’s what we did (I will write more on the specific actions we took in a later post).
The important thing was the results. 30% of the speakers at FOSS4G NA 2015 were women. To the best of my knowledge, this was at least double the next highest proportion of women participating in past FOSS4G events.
The women speaking talked about the impressive work they were doing, and the innovative solutions they developed to address challenging problems. The change in the audience mirrored the increased proportion of women speakers. For what it’s worth, the audience feedback on these talks was extremely positive.
We hope that next year even more amazing women share their experiences & knowledge by participating in the conference. There’s a long way to go, but it’s a good start.
The recent FOSS4G NA conference in Burlingame (March 9-12, 2015) was the third FOSS4G North America. On Monday, I blogged to communicate some of the cities being asked for in the attendee survey & from other interested people.
The conference is big enough that it takes a fair amount of work to organize. And, there’s a lot of thought that goes into where + when it should be hosted. How do we decide? Well, historically FOSS4G NA has had a very informal decision process. We’d like to do a little better. A chat started amongst the chairs for past North American FOSS4G events. We’d like to take that public now.
For what it’s worth, the conference’s big sibling, FOSS4G Global is selected by a panel of previous chairs. One tricky thing about this model is that it is a body of people who select who gets to join them. There’s a real risk of self selection and favouring people with similar ideas in this model. Also, as the conference evolves, does this model adapt to reflect those changes?
Another potential model proposed is to have participants (attendees, speakers, & sponsors) in the conference elect the team who will guide the conference and select the content for the next year. It has been suggested that this model should include representation from groups like OSGeo & LocationTech who have a strong interest in a well run conference. As well, diversity to reach out to underrepresented groups is very important, and there should be appropriate representation. This model is a bit more work to implement, but perhaps it’s worth the effort as it may be more dynamic?
There are pro’s and con’s to each approach. There’s likely another model we haven’t thought of yet. If you’d like to participate in the discussion & help figure out the model, please join this Google group. Everyone is welcome, and encouraged to participate. The discussion is public and archived.
For those who came to NA 2015, please take a moment to fill out the attendee survey we emailed to you. Included in that survey is where you’d like next year to be hosted.
Assuming the survey results show people were happy (so far so good!), we plan to get venue (& other service) bids from a number of cities.
For 2015, we looked at D.C., Austin, Boston, San Francisco, Portland, Denver, Philly, and more.
When the data all came back, it became very clear that San Francisco was the winner for various reasons… notably on the list, the hotel rate was $50/room/night less than the other bidders which we felt was important. Very nice to do outreach in the bay area too. Working with Ragi & the bay area geo community was awesome too!
In addition to the above… Charlotte N.C. & Raleigh might be possibilities for 2016. Normally having an international airport is a really big deal. For a regional conference like NA, maybe we have a bit more wiggle room and thus can consider other cities and maybe get an even better hotel rate!
What do you think? I’d love to hear from you.
If you weren’t at NA 2015, please feel free to comment here or drop me a line at andrew dot ross at eclipse dot org. I’d love to get your thoughts!