How about holding Wineconf at Google's campus in Mountain View, California?

[Jeremy White]

> To be fair to the minority shouldn't the conference be held in the US
> every third or fourth year?
> 
> I believe we should resolve this issue as well, and the sooner the
> better. Not the actual location but the continent on which it will be
> held on a given year. I recommend a three to one ratio, then at least
> we will have some idea on the location of future conferences.
>  Then we can vote on the locations within a given continent and not
> have to squabble each and every year over continent and location.

Well said.

We have had 2 Wineconf's in the US and 2 in Europe;
it's unfortunate that we didn't interleave them, but there you have it.

The one in the US where Lindows paid people to travel was still not
as well attended as the one in Europe, so I think a bias towards Europe is fair.

Hitting my random number generator makes me feel that 3 to 1 is rational,
which implies Europe this year, and then back to the US, where Dan and
I (or maybe someone else!) can fight over who gets to host.

I've copied in Hans and Martin, in the hope that they'll wake up and
realize that people are taking their Wineconf hosting offers seriously,
and encouraging them to make sure they're on this list.

I was personally very excited about travelling to Bratislava.  Then I priced
out plane tickets, and my excitement vanished; it may be that travel costs
to Slovakia create a barrier to holding it there.  That may just be my
ineptness in travelling there; US travel planning sites tend to be good
at the 'common' routes.

I do think Dan's idea to enable a satellite site is an intriguing one,
and could be a way of breaking this multi continent problem.  I think
we're jumping the gun on that a bit, though; we should maybe give
Dan a bit more time to figure out if it's feasible (I suspect, for starters,
that we need a host in Zurich for it to be practical.  Dan has someone
he's trying to talk into it, I believe, but...)

Cheers,

Jeremy