Re: GUADEC registration fee
- From: Mark McLoughlin <markmc redhat com>
- To: James Henstridge <james daa com au>
- Cc: Thomas Vander Stichele <thomas apestaart org>, Mikael Hallendal <micke imendio com>, foundation-list gnome org, guadec-planning gnome irg
- Subject: Re: GUADEC registration fee
- Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 14:54:31 +0100
On Wed, 2004-05-05 at 09:13, James Henstridge wrote:
> On 5/05/2004 3:12 PM, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:
> >I guess I don't mind the "hobbyist" fee at all, it's a small price to
> >pay for some and I would gladly pay it under any circumstances. But if
> >"corporate" fees apply to all people that just happen to work for a
> >company, it's too much.
> From Mark's mail in April:
> > From a brief discussion on irc, it seems that the idea behind such a
> >large fee is that only attendees who are being sponsored by their
> >employer should pay it, thereby increasing the corporate sponsorship of
> >the conference without having to chase companies at length.
> So "professional" should be interpreted as "my employer is sponsoring me
> to go" rather than "I work at a company". If your employer is not
> sponsoring you to go, or if they think it adds too much to the overall
> cost of sending you, pick the hobbyist fee instead.
The web page should be very explicit about this IMHO.
] [Thread Prev