On 28 September 2012 02:36, Buddhike Kurera <bckurera@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
We can identified interested countries first, then we can discuss on
the bi-weekly meeting which is the best area to host the event. Yes if
we need more info to decide then we can ask the teams to have them on
a wiki page like who are the organizing team and so on. ....... Then
considering every aspect we can come to a conclusion avoiding all the
hard work and competition. I dont like going for a election and
voting. i think we need to discuss more and pick the best place
because we need to **spread the project with in the region** and that
is the only goal behind. Therefore without voting it is possible to
discuss with team and come to an mutual agreement through mutual
understanding and so that way we can select the next host with no
disappointing.

I personally think the problem was happened on the candidate submission schedule and how well we have been sticking to that. That is:

  1. Confirm the next location as early as possible.
  2. The team in confirmed location prepare on time.
  3. Reduce conflicts by transparency on selection process.
 
I do not agree about any pre-decision before voting, as this may make the election and voting a meaningless event. As long as FAmSCo and Board have the power of final decision (in respect to overall views of regional communities), let's keep the choices in between 2 to 3 for assessment. Forcing a unnatural mutual agreement may save us some time, may also increase much risk.

After my attendance of FUDCon 2012 in KL, Malaysia; in terms of community mature level of Fedora, IMO China (Hong Kong, Taiwan or greater China) are not good enough for holding a FUDCon without help from foreign communities. Especially when Beijing applied for FUDCon 2011, there was gbraad (he's still there but looked much busy now) more capable to make things happen. 

Regards,
kaio