May 9, 2006 - When to make bids public

Jeremy Fluhmann responded to my Call for Venue post saying he'd be interested to see the other bids when they get posted. This brings up a good point: when should the bids be made public?

My thought was that they would be made public after the Conferences Committee has selected the host group. This allows people to see what we voted on and it's a good reference for next year.

But the comment suggests he was thinking the bids would be posted as soon as they are received. I hadn't thought of it that way, but maybe we could.

The obvious thing we would want to avoid is 'stealing' between bids. If one group does a ton of work, it wouldn't be fair for another group to just borrow a bunch of their stuff. I also wouldn't want people waiting until the last day to submit to avoid this. The benefit might be in improved bids, because people can compare.

For now, I'm inclined to keep it as it was last year. That is, I'll post the bids after the process is complete. Next year the bidders can benefit from this year. If a group wants to make their bid public on their own, they are welcome to do so. Any other thoughts from potential (or previous) bidders out there?


Interesting. I actually meant for it to refer to the previous years bids. I only found Chicago's. I can see where posting before the deadline would open it up to 'stealing between bids'. Maybe the idea of offering a generic template for 'new' bidders to use to make sure that they, at the very least, address every issue could be an option. I know the venue requirements and venue weights are posted, but maybe a simple structured template could encourage groups that don't know where to begin, to offer a bid. After looking at Chicago's bid, I'm able to get a sense of what should be included, but am still interested in how other people have written them in the past.

Another option could be to make public the 'proposed' venues by simply announcing what host cities are offering bids (or does that already happen?). But, I could see how that might get ugly if one group starts pointing out negatives about the other venues instead of positives about their own (not that it's likely to happen, but who knows).

How many groups typically offer bids? I see there were only three last year (Boston, Chicago, and Vancouver). I'm also wondering if the groups making the bids are the same ones every year. Is there only a handful of groups that try or do you get a different variety every year?

Thanks for the encouragement. I look forward to going through the process and hearing everyone's comments on the issue.

contributed by Jeremy Fluhmann on May 9, 2006 8:21 PM


Okay, sorry about that. I found the other two previous bid proposals. I just wasn't looking where I should have been.

contributed by Jeremy Fluhmann on May 19, 2006 6:02 AM

Tags:

  • conferences
  • yapc
  • Jeremy Fluhmann responded to my Call for Venue post saying he'd be interested to see the other bids when they get posted. This brings up a good point: when should the bids be made public?

    My thought was that they would be made public after the Conferences Committee has selected the host group. This allows people to see what we voted on and it's a good reference for next year.

    But the comment suggests he was thinking the bids would be posted as soon as they are received. I hadn't thought of it that way, but maybe we could.

    The obvious thing we would want to avoid is 'stealing' between bids. If one group does a ton of work, it wouldn't be fair for another group to just borrow a bunch of their stuff. I also wouldn't want people waiting until the last day to submit to avoid this. The benefit might be in improved bids, because people can compare.

    For now, I'm inclined to keep it as it was last year. That is, I'll post the bids after the process is complete. Next year the bidders can benefit from this year. If a group wants to make their bid public on their own, they are welcome to do so. Any other thoughts from potential (or previous) bidders out there?


    Interesting. I actually meant for it to refer to the previous years bids. I only found Chicago's. I can see where posting before the deadline would open it up to 'stealing between bids'. Maybe the idea of offering a generic template for 'new' bidders to use to make sure that they, at the very least, address every issue could be an option. I know the venue requirements and venue weights are posted, but maybe a simple structured template could encourage groups that don't know where to begin, to offer a bid. After looking at Chicago's bid, I'm able to get a sense of what should be included, but am still interested in how other people have written them in the past.

    Another option could be to make public the 'proposed' venues by simply announcing what host cities are offering bids (or does that already happen?). But, I could see how that might get ugly if one group starts pointing out negatives about the other venues instead of positives about their own (not that it's likely to happen, but who knows).

    How many groups typically offer bids? I see there were only three last year (Boston, Chicago, and Vancouver). I'm also wondering if the groups making the bids are the same ones every year. Is there only a handful of groups that try or do you get a different variety every year?

    Thanks for the encouragement. I look forward to going through the process and hearing everyone's comments on the issue.

    contributed by Jeremy Fluhmann on May 9, 2006 8:21 PM


    Okay, sorry about that. I found the other two previous bid proposals. I just wasn't looking where I should have been.

    contributed by Jeremy Fluhmann on May 19, 2006 6:02 AM

    Post a comment

    If you have an OpenId URL, you can enter it here to post comments on this site.

    Category

    This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on May 09, 2006.

    Many more entries can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

    Powered by
    Socialtext