[AUUG-Talk]: Any activity?
amcrae at employees.org
Thu Apr 24 13:35:13 EST 2008
On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 13:12 +1000, steve jenkin wrote:
> David Newall wrote on 24/4/08 12:33 PM:
> > steve jenkin wrote:
> >> This doesn't have to be BIG so long as it turns a profit, it can be
> >> built upon... Getting 50 paying conferenceteers shouldn't be hard if
> >> some planning and preparation are done. 100 would be better, and maybe
> >> even possible.
> > So, try to compete with linux.conf.au? Very big thing to ask of authors
> > and presenters.
> Why do you say that??
> [I mentioned we could REUSE their pricing structure, not address the
> same market niche.]
> AUUG is AUUG is Unix. Unix Ain't Linux Alone :-)
> If you go that far, then AUUG-BYC would compete with CEBIT and every
> other show/fair/conference...
Hmmm... I'm not sure if that is entirely correct.
AUUG was a fairly focused technical audience, and that audience
has significant (majority?) overlap with LCA. The commonalities
far outweigh the differences.
Historically, the AUUG yearly conference was often subsidised
by the accompanying exhibition, and the years that the conference
was big was IMHO driven by the strong interest at the time in Open
Systems and the business drivers around that. It was the hot
thing then. Time moves on. The exhibition was the tail that wagged the
dog, and so there was a definite move back to a technically
focused conference without a big exhibition attached. This worked
for a while, but the world changed, and AUUG shrank, LCA grew, and
this simply reflects where the interests of the community are.
IMHO, the sooner we recognise that, the better off we'll all be rather
than try and recreate past glories. I'm surprised that the membership
didn't vote to wind up, but there you go...
As an aside, if the only concern is to have some kind of legal
organisation where things can happen under an umbrella,
conceivably AUUG could become a SIG of ISOC-AU, which has
a paid ED, good sponsorship, existing SIGs, open membership
policies, and has a close enough mandate to make sense.
More information about the Talk