If it helps people budget, for reasons I don't understand, to call the 
pre-conf something other than a pre-conf, that's potentially doable.

I do like that it's the beginning so people can skip the "pre-conf" if 
that sort of activity (or the particular topics offered) are not useful 
to them though. OR if they can't afford the extra hotel for a day, or 
extra time off work, or what have you. Putting it in the middle, there'd 
be no good way to skip it. It really is intended as an extra optional 
thing that won't neccesarily be of use/interest to everyone; if the name 
is to be changed, it should also not be in a way that confuses potential 
attendees as to this fact.

It is still not obvious to me why calling it a "pre-conference" makes it 
harder for people to get budgetary approval than if it was called 
something else; is this a widepsread problem, or unique to Tim's 
organization?

On 11/10/2011 1:12 PM, Jason Stirnaman wrote:
> I agree that conference-ish things are mostly not broken, and that we
> should keep talking about this in order to make them better. I also
> think Tim makes an important point here:
>    >>then let's not separate the two parts of C4L conf like a
> traditional conference
> Why do we need to define workshops or hackfests as "pre-conference"?
> Why not just say "this is the conference: hackfests, workshops, talks,
> great people, and brew-tasting"? And maybe more people would participate
> or benefit if hackfest was "middle-conference" or "post-conference",
> i.e. after they're spurred by  presentations and ready to dive in.
> And couch-surfing ++
> I'm expecting I won't get to spend my library's entire travel budget to
> attend C4L this year and lodging obviously accounts for a huge chunk of
> that. If not, I'll just save up my bottles of KC's finest for next year
> and hope some newcomer replaces me in the registration rush.
>
> Jason
>
>
> Jason Stirnaman
> Biomedical Librarian, Digital Projects
> A.R. Dykes Library, University of Kansas Medical Center
> [log in to unmask]
> 913-588-7319
>
>
>>>> On 11/10/2011 at 11:01 AM, in message
> <[log in to unmask]>,
> Cary Gordon<[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>
>
> In the grand scheme of things, $150 for a conference is very low, and
> $320 for a pre conference is low, as well. This doesn't make them
> cheap or mean that everyone who would like to go, can go. I fully
> understand that $25 is in inconsequential amount of money… Unless it
> is your $25.
>
> I think that there is consensus that we want to keep c4l at its
> current size, and I think that money shouldn't be the primary factor
> determining attendance.
>
> Perhaps it would be good if we raised our price to $200 or $250,
> increased our sponsorship fundraising efforts, and used the excess to
> provide partial and full (including travel and lodging) scholarships
> for those who need them.
>
> Maybe we should encourage local couch surfing hosts.
>
> We should keep talking about this.
>
> Cary
>
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Timothy McGeary<[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>>> At $150 for registration, I agree with Kyle, that this is a very
> good price
>>> in comparison to most technical conferences. Perhaps you could
> consider the
>>> extra airfare and hotel room night as the price of the
> pre-conference.
>>
>> The extra airfare and hotel, in this case, is $320 per person.
> Hardly a
>> reasonable comparison.
>>
>> I realize that I'm now looking at this from a different perspective
> than
>> when I was a first time Code4Libber, when I was simply try to soak it
> all
>> in and build a network of people I could work with on projects that I
> and
>> my library were interested in.  Now I have to be concerned with
> budgets,
>> and getting people other than myself to C4L so they can join the
> community
>> and contribute.
>>
>> If the price points of rentals goes down because of the preconf day
> where
>> the costs are mostly a wash, then that's great, but then let's not
> separate
>> the two parts of C4L conf like a traditional conference, or put such
>> emphasis on the "participation" in a preconf that undermines or
> undervalues
>> the participation of someone coming to the conference days
> themselves.  We
>> can't have it both ways.  Code4Lib conferences *ARE* unique and they
> are
>> invaluable to many, many, many people who are fortunate enough to A)
>> register in time and B) can afford to come at all.  So let's not
> diminish
>> this by presuming or assuming anything, rather take extra care in
>> protecting this event as a treasure, lest all of the tireless efforts
> the
>> conference planners put forth be for naught.
>>
>> The last thing I'd want to see is C4L be under attended because
> people
>> couldn't justify reasonable costs to their organization due to lack
> of
>> information, openness, or mere confusion.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> --
>> Tim McGeary
>> Team Leader, Library Technology
>> Lehigh University
>> 610-758-4998
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>> GTalk/Yahoo/Skype/Twitter: timmcgeary
>> 484-938-TMCG (Google Voice)
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Fowler, Jason<[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>>>>   let people completely fend for themselves w/r/t to food/drink on
> the
>>> preconference day.
>>>
>>> Coders consume from the "flat" food group.  Anything that fits
> beneath a
>>> door…
>>>
>>> ..jason
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11-11-09 3:12 PM, "Kevin S. Clarke"<[log in to unmask]<mailto:
>>> [log in to unmask]>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Kyle Banerjee<[log in to unmask]
>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>  wrote:
>>> Yes, we have.  We've even had people want to come to the
> preconference
>>> (and pay the preconference charge) but not attend the regular
>>> conference.  :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> They've wanted to do it, but have they actually been able to? What
> makes
>>> c4l worthwhile is the ability to mix it up. If people attend with
> the
>>> intention of just receiving specific training, they're not
> contributing and
>>> that undermines the experience for everyone.
>>>
>>> Yes... at least at the Asheville conference (though there were just
> a
>>> couple).
>>>
>>> C4l has seen both free and paid preconferences and it's easy enough
> to
>>> rationalize either.
>>>
>>> Having put on a paid preconference, I think if I were to do it
> again
>>> I'd make it free.  We received several comments about the lack of
> food
>>> at the Asheville preconference (though we had coffee).  I think
> having
>>> a price attached to it leads to expectations like that.  Perhaps it
> is
>>> better to just say "The preconference is free... the price for the
>>> conference is $150" ... let people completely fend for themselves
>>> w/r/t to food/drink on the preconference day.
>>>
>>> Fwiw...
>>>
>>> Kevin
>>>
>
>
> --
> Cary Gordon
> The Cherry Hill Company
> http://chillco.com
>