rjb@cucard.UUCP (02/26/84)
y likely that there will be a USENIX conference in January in Dallas at a different location from that of Uni- Forum (/usr/group's meeting). If there is to be a USENIX conference in Dallas a number of questions arise: * Do most USENIX members want to attend a large convention such as UNIFORUM in Washington? or would a smaller somewhat less commercial (a scaled down vendor exhibit, for instance) meeting be preferable? * Granting that the good old days are gone forever, is it possible, nevertheless, to hold a conference of a size and nature such that people who are serious UNIX users/hackers can talk to each other to their mutual benefit? Or is this sort of forum adequately provided by UUCP, USENET, and the various new UNIX-oriented publications? * Does USENIX need to hold a conference more than once a year in the spring? Are there enough good presentations to warrant two full sessions of technical talks per year? * Should USENIX hold only one meeting per year in June or July leaving the January meeting to /usr/group? * More specifically, should USENIX hold a meeting in Dallas in Jan 1985? -- Reidar Bornholdt ..!harpo!cucard!reidar
reidar@cucard.UUCP (02/28/84)
<Sorry, the first version of this was mangled for lack of this stuff>
Many people have noticed the friction which exists between USENIX and
/usr/group, particularly at the conferences which have been jointly spon-
sored. It was evident in Washington that one of the major problems was a
difference of emphasis between the two organizations; /usr/group gives
much more importance to the vendor show, USENIX to the technical program.
Another factor was /usr/group's evident intention to take over entirely
at least the winter meetings.
It is the case that USENIX is not a co-sponsor of the conference in
Dallas next January. It seems very likely that there will be a USENIX
conference in January in Dallas at a different location from that of Uni-
Forum (/usr/group's meeting). If there is to be a USENIX conference in
Dallas a number of questions arise:
* Do most USENIX members want to attend a large convention such as
UNIFORUM in Washington? or would a smaller somewhat less commercial
(a scaled down vendor exhibit, for instance) meeting be preferable?
* Granting that the good old days are gone forever, is it possible,
nevertheless, to hold a conference of a size and nature such that
people who are serious UNIX users/hackers can talk to each other to
their mutual benefit? Or is this sort of forum adequately provided
by UUCP, USENET, and the various new UNIX-oriented publications?
* Does USENIX need to hold a conference more than once a year in the
spring? Are there enough good presentations to warrant two full
sessions of technical talks per year?
* Should USENIX hold only one meeting per year in June or July leaving
the January meeting to /usr/group?
* More specifically, should USENIX hold a meeting in Dallas in Jan 1985?
--
Reidar Bornholdt
..!harpo!cucard!reidarmark@umcp-cs.UUCP (02/29/84)
In academic computer science, we have a trick for recovering the
good old days of small conferences. It is to have "workshops",
the price of admisssion to which is (among other things) a position
paper on the subject of the workshop. This tends to weed out the
mere observers/non-contributers. We could do this for a usenix
conference, somehow, perhaps.
Without something like this small conferences are hopeless.
--
Spoken: Mark Weiser ARPA: mark@maryland
CSNet: mark@umcp-cs UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!markjerry@utteeth.UUCP (Jerry J. Deroo) (03/02/84)
<a magic cookie>
Reidar Bornholdt brings some interesting points forward in <151@cucard.UUCP>
I am a bit concerned over the discussion on this group of late, and
where it is heading.
What are the problems in holding a joint conference?
Personally, I enjoy the mix of technical discussions and the
commercial side of things which was presented in Washington.
I ventured there, at my own expense, specifically to get a handle
on where the *NIX market place was going. (Being in Canada does have
some dis-advantages).
If there is such animosity between the two groups, where is it coming from?
Is it at the executive level? Or at the grass-roots level?
I find it hard to believe that even the most dyed-in-the-wool technical
person does not get a kick out of wandering about the vendor exhibits,
if only to see how many systems they can break.
I favour the type of joint conference that Washington was, where I could
choose which session I wanted to sit in on.
While *I* did not choose to partake in many of the /usr/group sessions,
I did enjoy the ones that I went to. Fortunately, the concurrent USENIX
seesions that I missed in this way were not that appealing to me.
Is this a point of contention, trying to schedule concurrent sessions such
that a minimum portion of the attendees don't have to make a real difficult
descision on which of two sessions to sit in on?
Acutally, I am wondering if three days are enough for the amount of
presentations people want to make.
The material presented at both Toronto and Washington was, on the whole,
worthwile.
I am against a separate conference in Dallas, unless my registration fee
can get me into either without a hassle.
--
Jerry J. Deroo, U of Toronto Dentistry
{ utzoo utcsstat}!utteeth!jerryscherrer@mtxinu.UUCP (Deborah Scherrer) (03/09/85)
Scheduling and Content of USENIX Meetings
A Message to the USENIX Membership
Alan Nemeth, USENIX President
At the Summer '84 Salt Lake USENIX conference, we took a survey of atten-
dees to get input on a number of topics related to the conferences. For exam-
ple, most people felt that a printed conference proceedings available on-site
was very useful. For this reason, the Dallas conference organizers worked
very hard to produce a proceedings, and we intend to continue the practice.
Among others, the following policy issues were covered in the survey:
1. Should USENIX hold one or two conferences per year?
2. Is it desirable to hold one USENIX conference jointly with /usr/group?
A majority of those surveyed answered "yes" to both questions. However,
both questions may have been tied together in many minds: it was assumed that
if two conferences were held yearly, then one of them would be held jointly
with the /usr/group UniForum show (which is held yearly each winter). In
response to the survey and the general direction of the UniForum show, we
developed the idea that UniForum would be a huge UNIX trade show/conference,
and USENIX could have one of its technical meetings at the same place (thus
minimizing travel time and expense for the many attendees who want both kinds
of information). Our conference would be a bit shorter, so as to easily coex-
ist with UniForum. The other (summer) USENIX conference would be longer, and
would have its own vendor show. The vendor show would be smaller that Uni-
Forum, with a different focus.
In order to hold a joint conference, both organizations must agree to the
following:
1. Registration procedures and policies.
2. Division of revenues and expenses.
3. Show/conference management procedures.
4. Promotion.
5. Allocation of hotel, conference, and exhibit space.
As the two organizations have somewhat different goals and methods, it is
not surprising that there is opportunity for controversy and dispute. In past
years, there have indeed been a number of disputes. These disputes have been
sharpened and intensified by internal debates within each organization about
their respective rolls in the community. Both organizations have been adapt-
ing to changing conditions and goals. Finally, meetings of any size (e.g.
1500 or more) must be planned and scheduled with long lead times. It is not
easy to find good facilities. Hotel and convention facilities must be booked
well in advance, with severe financial penalties for cancellation. (If we had
decided to cancel the Dallas conference after the hotel contract had been
signed, we would have been liable for on the order of $100,000 in damages.)
In line with the survey results, the USENIX Association held its Dallas
conference at the same time and in the same city as UniForum. It was not pos-
sible to reach agreement with /usr/group to allow simple cross-registration in
both conferences, although complementary registration to the trade show was
arranged. There was also some geographic separation of sites (with shuttle
bus service or a seven minute cab ride). Our conference seemed to go well.
Although the USENIX conference and UniForum were separate events, our confer-
ence was designed to be non-competitive, concentrating on the more technical
aspects of UNIX systems. We also shortened the conference by one day. This
reduced the overlap of sessions, thus making it more convenient for our
members to also attend the UniForum show.
As noted above, to have a fully-integrated joint conference, there must
be good agreement on all major issues, and this agreement must be reached well
in advance. We were not able to reach a suitable agreement with respect to
the Winter '86 UniForum show in Anaheim. Again, we could not resolve all
issues related to a full joint conference. We did explore repeating the Dal-
las setup - separate conference, but in the same city at the same time. How-
ever, all suitable hotel space was already booked by UniForum. A hotel would
have to release /usr/group from its contract, and replace it with USENIX.
/usr/group stated that the hotel space could not be released to USENIX. (It
appears that the same may also hold true for 1987.) Therefore, we were faced
with three alternatives:
1. Cancel the Winter '86 USENIX meeting.
2. Hold the meeting at the same time in the closest city with a suitable
facility, in this case Los Angeles or San Diego (nothing closer is avail-
able). Commuting times from USENIX to UniForum would then be at least one
hour, and perhaps two hours.
3. Hold the meeting at some other time and place.
We chose option 3. No option is entirely suitable. Our membership has
stated a preference for two meetings a year. Option 2 seemed incredibly
inconvenient for attendees of both meetings. Option 3 causes extra time and
travel expense for persons desiring to attend both conferences. Many people
find it hard to budget even one conference per year. A second conference can
sometimes be slipped in as a trade show involving sales activity, but three
conferences (one /usr/group, two USENIX) may be just too much.
Since it is clear that not everyone will attend every conference, our
solution is to provide a smaller, more specialized winter meeting, and a
larger, more general summer meeting. Our current thinking is that the winter
meeting will focus on specific topic areas, and may in fact consist mostly of
workshops rather than general sessions.
Accordingly, we have scheduled our next winter conference for January
15-17, 1986 in Denver, Colorado, thus separating it by three weeks from the
UniForum show to be held February 3-7, 1986 in Anaheim, California. Our next
summer conference is scheduled for June 11-14, 1985 in Portland, Oregon.
Our members should note that, although /usr/group and USENIX will not be
meeting jointly in Anaheim, relations between the two organizations have been
steadily improving. The direction of each organization has been changing, and
some of the conflicts of the past no longer apply. It is possible that joint
conferences will be held in the future. We would appreciate continued com-
ments from the membership on our conference directions.wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (03/14/85)
There's another option that doesn't seem to have been discussed (maybe it was considered but not included in the posting?) -- this is to have one USENIX meeting that is co-located with Uniforum, as mentioned, but to hold it the preceeding or following week; at the end of the week if preceeding, at the start of the week if following. Thus, those who want to attend both meetings can, but still pay only one airfare. The only added expense would be staying over some days longer, and, since that would be weekend stays at the hotels, which normally have rooms going begging on the weekends (that's why they offer those special deals for weekend stays), the room rates for the whole period could be negotiated down for the per-day rate for those staying the whole period. (This latter is a significant point for government-activity attendees, who can get no more than $75 per day for combined room and meals -- a figure that has stayed unchanged through years of inflation.) Yes, it is true that many people will not like to be away from their families over the weekend. However, if this meeting is always chosen to be in an attractive location, such as a winter meeting in California or the like, the attractions of a "free" weekend in that place will be enough to overcome that dislike. Also, a few social events could be scheduled for that weekend; scheduling them in evenings usually interferes with BOF's and the like anyway. This seems to me to give all the advantages of co-locating with Uniforum (for both attendees and exhibitors) without the disadvantages. If this was considered and rejected, it would be interesting to know the reasons for the rejection. I realize that such arrangements cannot be made on short notice, for the next couple years, but the Association could aim for this sort of setup in 1988 and on, mayhap. Will Martin USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin or ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA
mike@hcradm.UUCP (Mike Tilson) (03/16/85)
A question was asked about running Usenix meetings in the same city
as UniForum, either the week before or the week after, so that people
could attend both in just one (longer) trip, with one airfare, etc.
This option was considered by the Usenix board and rejected. While
it would certainly make it possible to attend both events at lower
cost, we felt that:
1. For people who were going to attend *only* one or the other, it
obviously made no difference,
2. For most people who wanted to attend both, the disruption caused by
being away from the office or school for two weeks in a row
was worse than the added cost, and
3. The ideal city for UniForum (which needs a large convention/trade
show facility) is not necessarily ideal for Usenix. (For example,
I think Portland is going to be a very good site for the June
conference, but it is very unlikely that UniForum would ever go
there.)
We know that for some people a two-week event would be the best solution,
but it was our feeling that it was not for the majority of people. (As
an example, I personally find the thought of a two-week UNIX meeting
horrifying. The only thing that justifies the hassle of being away from
the office for two or more weeks is a vacation!)
The Usenix board would be interested to hear from you if you think we
have mis-estimated the preference of our conference attendees. (Please
send mail on the subject, don't post to the net. Thanks.)
/ Mike Tilson Human Computing Resources Corp.
Usenix Association board member
{utzoo,decvax}!hcr!hcradm!mike