[EuroPython] Talks, acceptance and fish
huima at iki.fi
Wed Mar 2 17:33:09 CET 2005
Chris Withers said...
> Indeed, but there is already a refereed track, or am I mistaken?
> More work, less dynamism... sounds like programming in Java
> I actually thought the Zope track last year was pretty good...
Everything does not need to be dynamic and ad hoc...
I agree that zope track was ok last year, however as a person managing it
- I was untill the actual show in total blackout about what would happen
and what would the talk be. I did and had to trust the presenters to do a
good show without almost any prior knowledge on what the contents will be.
It did work in previous years, but there is a chance of also having a not
so good luck. And what we are talking about is minimizing that risk.
> Come on Paul, EVERY presentation can use more refinement and practice,
> just like all software has bugs to fix somewhere, or features that could
> be added...
> Yes, this is tricky, well, I'm sure together we'll all come up with a
> decent process...
Yes. What we are proposing and promoting is to have a little more
structure without throeing out the creativity. Like I said, I am ok with
allowing presenters to improve the presentations over the time, so it
would not be like a true refereed track. More visibility to us as
organizers and better information also to visitors.
> PS: Another thing that is a possibility, but hopefully an unlikely one,
> is that if everyone prepares the talks in advance, people just read the
> presentations and don't bother turning up, so we still end up with
> everyone outside chatting
We would not release the presentations before the conference - and slides
/ talk-materials ARE NOT the same as actively participating in talk,
atleast when a good speaker is concerned and when talk is good.
If there are no big objections, we will implement these changes and try to
be at the sametime flexible and firm to allow dynamicism but also get
reassurance on a good quality talks.
More information about the EuroPython