rmathews at gmail.com
Tue Apr 19 04:52:00 CEST 2011
Don't flatter yourself, I was arguing for the sake of the conference.
If the college is going to be asked about this then should be phrased as
"we'll have a three day conference, with paid tutorials on the first day,
and paid presentations on the next two. Is that okay?" No point phrasing it
in a way that makes it look like we expect them to say no.
But this is only relevant if it has been decided that the tutorials are to
be paid for. Is the only objection to paid tutorials the fact that the
hosting college might have a problem with this?
On Apr 19, 2011 7:39 AM, "Kenneth Gonsalves" <lawgon at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 07:27 +0530, Roshan Mathews wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 05:01, Kenneth Gonsalves <lawgon at gmail.com>
>> > On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 23:20 +0530, Noufal Ibrahim wrote:
>> >> Also, can someone check with the venue whether they have problems
>> >> us taking payments for the tutorials (if we are i.e.).
>> > this has to be confirmed first - if they are not going to allow
>> > 'commercial' activity we have to know *now*.
>> Why is this any more 'commercial' than the conference itself? We
>> didn't ask them if they have a problem with us selling tickets for
>> attendees. Would they have a problem if we paid the conference
>> speakers (in cash? or free food/drinks/books?)
> please do not argue for the sake of argument - academic bodies have
> policies. One such policy is that if a venue is given free, no
> 'commercial' activity can take place. They get to define 'commercial'.
> Usually charging a token fee for attending does not come under their
> definition. We just need to find out their policy.
> Kenneth Gonsalves
> Inpycon mailing list
> Inpycon at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Inpycon