[beyond-licensing] Panel Discussion at OSCON EU?

[Deb Nicholson]

Breadth would seem incomplete to me without a staff person from a
charitable non-profit. We could probably get an industry/board member to
cover two hats at once -- especially on this list. :)

I'm also a bit wary of the word developer in this context, since it tends
to mean code-only contributors and would prefer the more general word
"contributor" for that perspective.
On May 23, 2016 2:17 PM, "O'Brien, Duane" <duobrien at paypal.com> wrote:

I like the look of #3 as well.

My first swipe at a panel with some breadth would be to include a
developer, a board member, someone from a corporation, and someone in the
devrel or community space.

What does a wide breadth of panelists look like to the rest of you?

From: <baconandcoconut at gmail.com> on behalf of Deb Nicholson <
deb at eximiousproductions.com>
Date: Monday, May 23, 2016 at 11:04 AM
To: Karen Sandler <karen at sfconservancy.org>
Cc: Beyond Licensing Working Group <beyond-licensing at opensource.org>,
"O'Brien, Duane" <duobrien at paypal.com>
Subject: Re: [beyond-licensing] Panel Discussion at OSCON EU?

Hi,
I just reread the thread (some things got sick in spam ) and realized you
may be proposing something more specific/general about the Beyond Licensing
work group.

I see a few possibilities.
1) Report on the working groups' work which may be tricky depending on how
much progress/consensus we've had by October. At the very least, it would
have to be a fairly general proposal at this stage.

2) Have a second town hall session focused on getting European input. We'd
need OSI buy-in and this one might the most sense as a co-located event.

3) Have several different stakeholders discuss what they see as important
for the community as we move "Beyond Licensing." I'd want to make sure we
got a wide breadth of panelists for this to avoid any feeling that we (some
supposed cabal) are usurping the conversation.

My favorite is number three. I'm here in NY with Deb Bryant who is also
willing be involved if we need her.

Cheers,
Deb
On May 23, 2016 1:48 PM, "Deb Nicholson" <deb at eximiousproductions.com>
wrote:

> I would also be happy to participate. Maybe Deb Bryant could share her
> text from the OSCON Austin panel for tweaking?
> Cheers,
> Deb
> On May 23, 2016 1:22 PM, "Karen Sandler" <karen at sfconservancy.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm happy to participate if that's helpful :)
>>
>> karen
>>
>> On 2016-05-23 13:14, O'Brien, Duane wrote:
>>
>>> (My bad on the bounce, I emailed the bounced address.)
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On May 23, 2016, at 10:13 AM, Allison Randal <allison at opensource.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> This message seems to have bounced from the mailing list, not sure why.
>>> Sending it on...
>>>
>>> On 05/23/2016 01:02 PM, O'Brien, Duane wrote:
>>> Hi all.
>>>
>>> We’ve got about six-ish hours left until the CFP for OSCON EU closes. Is
>>> there interest in with working group to put together a panel discussion?
>>> We could present some of the topics we’ve been discussing, any work we
>>> complete to date, take questions, etc. I would be happy to shepherd the
>>> submission through the process, but we’ll need too pull together a
>>> speaker list and an abstract in the next few hours.
>>>
>>> Any takers?
>>> -D
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> beyond-licensing mailing list
>>> beyond-licensing at opensource.org
>>> https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beyond-licensing
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> beyond-licensing mailing list
>> beyond-licensing at opensource.org
>> https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beyond-licensing
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/beyond-licensing_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20160523/c38c0612/attachment.html>