also sprach Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@gwolf.org> [2014-09-21 03:48 +0200]:
> If we could in some way recover the practice to prepare a small
> paper for a talk presentation, I think the aspects we are
> discussing would surely get better. But I don't know how we can
> require people to prepare a paper.
For many subjects, it'd be hard to write a "paper". But why not make
this the description, i.e. require that the description be really
good and proof that you have thought about it already a lot.
There will always be people who write their talk during the
conference, which is their problem and nothing we can or should
guard against.
However, while I agree with Gunnar that we should not select for
presentation capability, we should for the benefit of the talks
selection in the following make sure to keep in mind people who
failed to prepare their presentation properly, or honour those who
clearly did.
Also, I do believe it's good and desirable to provide early feedback
to the proposers, asking for modifications to the proposal,
suggesting a smaller time slot, or suggesting to team up with
another presenter who wants to do something similar. Sure, you as
the speaker won't like it if you cannot have your way, but we have
limited time slots available and our goal should be high quality
content for our attendees, don't you think?
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org> @martinkrafft
: :' : DebConf orga team
`. `'`
`- DebConf15: Heidelberg, Germany: http://debconf15.debconf.org
DebConf16 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)