 |
 |
This can't have been an easy decision. Thank you, to the Chattanooga local committee, for all of the work you've already put in -- much of which will be, sadly, even more invisible, now that we are not holding the conference there. I'm not sad that we aren't holding the conference in Chattanooga--despite wanting to see the city and experience the conference that the locals would have planned!--because, finances aside, that legislation would have put some of our community members in a real bind, if it passed. I'm proud to see our community living its ideals. - Coral On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Schurr, Andrea <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Not only quite difficult, but fiscally irresponsible... We'd be asking an > organization unaffiliated with Code4Lib to guarantee contracts for hundreds > of thousands of dollars -- when there is a legitimate concern that > Tennessee could pass legislation that would cause almost half of our > community to refuse to attend (not to mention the very real possibility of > being boycotted by entire municipalities/states). In the end, we felt like > we made the only reasonable choice. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > Collier, Aaron > Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 1:28 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Update Regarding C4L17 in Chattanooga > > I would guess that the swing between "current" and "if passed" makes > securing the financial sponsor quite difficult. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > Matt Sherman > Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 10:20 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Update Regarding C4L17 in Chattanooga > > Just listening in, part of the discussion on Slack and IRC made it sound > like the financing was the bigger issue. > > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Matt Connolly <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > > On Jun 7, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Brian Rogers <[log in to unmask]<mailto: > [log in to unmask]>> wrote: > > > > We’ve determined that given this community’s commitment to providing a > safe and accommodating environment for all attendees, it is morally and > fiscally irresponsible to continue the effort of hosting the annual > conference in Chattanooga. This decision was not an easy one, and there > were hours of discussion as to the pros and cons of proceeding, informed by > your responses to the survey, as well as our individual opinions. > > > > The survey results clearly show that the vast majority of respondents > were not interested in boycotting Code4Lib Chattanooga. What number would > have inclined you to proceed, if a 75% affirmative vote wasn’t positive > enough? > > > > — Matt > > > > > > ----------------- > > Matt Connolly > > Applications developer, CUL-IT > > 218 Olin Library > > Cornell University > > (607) 255-0653 >