[EuroPython] Work on Call for Participation for EuroPython 2015 has started

[Paul Boddie]

On Sunday 2. February 2014 00.39.15 Hynek Schlawack wrote:
> 
> It’s quite the contrary: the current organizers were criticized for
> their current work they do and I tried to explain that romanticism about
> a conference in 2007 isn’t helping, that it’s great to have at least
> one big European Python conference, they are hard to do, and to the end:
> let them do their thing.

I'm not criticising the current organisers. In fact, I don't think anyone is, 
not even the apparently malign EuroPython Society.

Any mention of 2007 is just to provide historical context. You can paint that 
as "romanticism" or nostalgia or whatever, but since the people involved 
actually organised it before and actually run events now in various cases, and 
since one might consider them candidates for running the conference in future, 
I think it's worth listening to what they have to say about it.

> But apparently it changed into “organizing big conferences is hard,
> you should do it if you like them so much because it’s hard to find
> organizers” without anybody telling me.

Well, if the opinions of the people with experience don't count, or if they do 
count but only enough for everyone to realise that they're not interested in 
doing it at the desired scale, maybe we do need to find organisers including 
those for a passion for seeing a big conference happen.

> >> Perhaps it would be sad to downsize EuroPython, but unless you have
> >> people willing to take the conference on at the scale you prefer - and
> >> they do have valid reasons to be wary of doing so - then there may be no
> >> other choice. That's all I'm saying.
> > 
> > Agreed.
> 
> Same as above.

Right. We all agree that limiting the number of people who can attend 
EuroPython might be a practical matter.

> Let me be crystal clear here: I don’t feel entitled to big
> EuroPythons.  I am thankful of *any* volunteer work that gets done.  But
> that’s very different from intentionally asking for – or even
> mandating – a downsize. And that’s all I was arguing about.

Right. So if we go back to what was actually said...

> > I'd actually rather cap the number of attendees than raise prices.
> 
> I find this an unfortunate line of though; EuroPython is the only
> explicitly European Python conference. Keeping it artificially small
> just makes it either less interesting or simply elitist.

...maybe we can all just about see that any suggestion of capping attendance 
might have been motivated by practical considerations. Even this...

> > I see this as far more important than having as many attendees as
> > possible.

...makes sense from a purely practical perspective. You can't really choose a 
venue that's big enough for a few hundred and then change it for a bigger one 
when you realise that your conference is really popular. And if you have to 
anticipate thousands of people, you have to step into the big league and take 
a huge gamble by booking a venue that you then really need to fill.

If it's a choice between "having as many attendees as possible" (and thus 
taking big gambles or messing venues around and paying cancellation fees) and 
accepting that there will be a limit, most people will not take the risks of 
the former approach. Again, ask the PSF about PyCon 2009 if you don't regard 
this as a concern.

So, I think we can all agree that no-one was being elitist at all, unless 
elitist means not being willing to lose six-figure sums on planning a 
community conference.

Paul