On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 5:35 PM, SUMIT KUMAR RAJ <sumit786raj@gmail.com> wrote:
I am relating votes with popularity and quality to be checked by you people before the voting is made.

IMHO, that's exactly why votes are detrimental to the talk selection process. Even if we limit the voting the attendees, recognizable individuals within the community and individuals from large corporate cohorts will receive higher votes than a newbie who is trying to submit a proposal for the first time. Why not just have the editorial panel decide all the talks? (In a transparent way like https://github.com/rubyaustralia/rubyconfau-2013-cfp/, where you can still comment and see all proposals, but no voting). 
 


On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Kushal Das <kushaldas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 5:23 PM, SUMIT KUMAR RAJ <sumit786raj@gmail.com> wrote:
> At least this will reduce any bogus voting . You guys first pick the quality
> ..People attending will decide the popularity.
> Best of best.
>
Votes do not talk about quality.

Kushal
--
CPython Core Developer
http://fedoraproject.org
http://kushaldas.in
_______________________________________________
Inpycon mailing list
Inpycon@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/inpycon



--
Regards...
----------------------
Sumit Kumar Raj
Software Engineer,
Yodlee Infotech Pvt. Ltd.
Bangalore,India



_______________________________________________
Inpycon mailing list
Inpycon@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/inpycon