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

Re: [Debconf-team] Talk selection: session chairs

I also like the idea, sadly I think it won't work with the current 
workflow we have. As Andreas said:

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 08:49:30AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I doubt that this would work for DebConf - but I would
> like to rise this problem:  *If* we want to build topic related
> sessions it is hard to put all the different events into similarly
> shaped (according to the number of talks) sessions we probably need
> to define some topics before the application process starts.

And besides defining the topics, find a person who is the chair for every 
topic, then assign to this big session a big slot in the schedule, like full 
morning or afternoon. This slot will be almost impossible to change later if 
there are problems with one speaker (it is complicated to move 1 talk, imagine 
if you have to move 4 all together).

I want to highlight that a huge part of the schedule is the unofficial track
that is pretty much scheduled between the last 2 weeks before debconf and a
few hours before the event during the conference. Even if it is a bit
crazy for scheduling, I think it is one of the good points of debconf.

> The second thought I want to bring in is the (un)famous official /
> inoffical talk concept.  Last year I officially annouonced that I'm not
> volunteering for the scheduler job if this completely confusing concept
> is not dropped (you might like to search the debconf mailing list
> archives for some alternative ideas we discussed - I'm currently to busy
> to do so, sorry).  This concept just sucks and is just confusing.  But
> if we end up with some kind of "rating" of the events (whatever it might
> be) I would like to mention in regard to the session-idea: My principle
> of putting somehow related talks in the two categories we had was to
> have one "session" (day or half a day) with the "official" talks of one
> topic and have another session with the inofficial talks to make sure
> all people who are interested are able to attend both.

Yes, we should discuss this.
Unofficial talks are not recorded and they were scheduled last minute,
what else is the difference?
Currently we have the situation: speaker submit talk, talk is rejected but it
can be unofficial. What does speaker gains for submitting the talk? The
argument "you get for sure one slot for your talk" is not good since we always
have room. 
Even worse, why we need them a selection committee if in the end everything,
except very very last minute stuff, gets scheduled?


Reply to: