also sprach Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> [2014-09-19 13:37 +0200]:
> Would some sort of wiki-ish approach to talk proposals be
> possible? ie, let people propose talk ideas publically, with the
> ability for other people to help improve the description, add
> suggestions or correct typos before the talk review happens? Could
> let attendees provide an indication of interest in a topic in
> advance too?
Could probably done with Summit, but I'd really prefer if noone else
edited the description of what I am expected to present. But
a comment feature would be nice. There is also a way to star talks
you are interested in.
> An alternative approach: just reject any talks with poor descriptions.
> Try to tell submitters early if their description isn't good enough --
> maybe give them a short extension after the deadline to resubmit a
> better description even, but otherwise leave it up to the submitter.
Yeah, I favour this approach.
> > - Ask participants to provide links to previous events or
> > videos, allowing us to evaluate the quality of the speaker.
> > Note that I am not talking about witty audience magnets only,
> > and I have seen fantastic(ally prepared) speakers who
> > presented in their !first language and didn't have perfect
> > slides.
>
> Does/can debconf offer any help to poor speakers with great ideas?
> Like, maybe hooking up a new speaker with an experience speaker to
> help draft/review slides, or something like that? Could have some
> volunteers available to help folks write good descriptions for their
> proposal too, maybe?
I nominate Anthony Towns. I've seen him speak well and he seems
eager to help! ;)
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org> @martinkrafft
: :' : DebConf orga team
`. `'`
`- DebConf14: Portland, OR, USA: http://debconf14.debconf.org
DebConf15: Heidelberg, Germany: http://debconf15.debconf.org
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)