Re: Talk/event proposals "Closed source"
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 3:59 PM, Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> wrote:
> I feel that as recurring Content Lead, I should join and answer this
> thread, even if it has been mostly answered.
>
> Holger Levsen dijo [Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 01:36:46PM +0000]:
>> > It seems talk/event proposals go into a black box until approved
>> > by a "secret" committee, or discarded.
>>
>> the members of the content team are public, there is not secret
>> committee.
>
> Right - I feel Dan relates to Content as "secret-handling
> committee". Which is closer to truth.
>
>> > In fact
>> > https://debconf18.debconf.org/cfp/
>> > doesn't mention that proposals are secret, which is quite different than
>> > one would expect with Debian, and
>>
>> in 19 years of DebConfs AFAIK you are the first to bring this up, so I
>> dont think this unexpected or a surprise.
>>
>> also this is how all conferences i know operate. there are other models,
>> like barcamps, however, which operate differently.
>
> There are many things that are not handled public within Debian, even
> within DebConf. Say, choosing who gets funded (both for travel and for
> food/accom bursaries) is not and should never be public
> information. Prospective approaches to sponsors should also be kept
> secret as well.
>
> Proposed talks and activities are also quite sensitive, IMO. As Holger
> says, we have always handled this process in private, and I don't
> expect us to change it soon. An important part of a conference is
> coming up with the best possible lineup of talks as a coherent,
> planned schedule, and that unfortunately means rejecting some.
I have always wondered about this.
I am not arguing for or against anything, just trying to understand,
and I suspect help others understand too.
Can someone elaborate on why
"unfortunately means rejecting some."
is a reason to keep anything about this secret?
>
>> > My worry is, with this "closed source" model, maybe many valuable
>> > talk/event ideas will be missed/skipped/lost/not understood therefore
>> > discarded.
>>
>> there's always lightning talks.
>
> There are many options for people whose talks are not approved. First
> and foremost, we have the "self-scheduled talks". Main differences?
>
> 1. They are not part of the official schedule, announced a couple of
> weeks before the conference
>
> 2. They are usually held in smaller rooms, although sometimes they can
> take a space in our "official" rooms (although this often only
> happens when there was a cancellation, or with the few "holes" we
> didn't fill in the schedule)
>
> 3. They do not have video recording nor streaming (as we cannot afford
> enough video gear and, mostly, volunteers to cover them).
>
> You can see last year's schedule¹ — Everything scheduled in the Potato
> and Woody rooms was self-scheduled. You can look at the details of the
> process in the announcement I made to debconf-announce². I guess a
> similar scheme can work this year.
>
> ¹ https://debconf17.debconf.org/schedule/
> ² https://lists.debian.org/debconf-announce/2017/08/msg00002.html
>
>> > Nor is there any "public oversight" process where we can see if it was
>> > 90 out of 100 ideas were rejected, of just 2 out of 12, etc.
>>
>> you are free to join the content team.
>
> Yes, you are free and welcome to join us.
>
> - Gunnar
> Content Team
Reply to: