[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-team] Re: bof proposal periode until last minute


* Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@gwolf.org> [051214 18:58]:

[ registering BoF sessions ]
> Someone could, and someone just has :)

Very good.

> Now... I have a question on this, which maybe I should have brought
> up earlierr, given that last year it was also like this: We should
> have mentioned this in the CfP. Last year, the only real difference
> (for me) between the talks that went through the academic committee
> and were approved and those which were rejected and downgraded to BoFs
> was the inclusion of a paper in the proceedings, instead of just the
> abstract. BoFs requested in anticipation (i.e., not the glasshouse
> ones) were scheduled and treated just as normal talks - This makes it
> a bit unfair towards people who had to submit full papers, and we are
> not even mentioning that in our CfP. Even more, we have 9 people who
> have submitted BoF sessions, maybe expecting to enter the official
> selection contest and be scheduled according to their proposal's merit
> - They will be included with all the rest of the chaff anyway.

I think we discussed that a couple of weeks ago, and I think we agreed,
that it was confusing last year.

We discussed the Idea to not just transfer rejected talks to BoFs, but
to reject them really, but invite the proposer to hold a BoF instead,
informing the proposer, that people expect things to be different in a

Yours sincerely,


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: