[Inpycon] Development Sprints

sankarshan foss.mailinglists at gmail.com
Wed Oct 15 12:55:22 CEST 2014


On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Abhaya Agarwal
<abhaya.agarwal at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Arvi Krishnaswamy <arvi at alumni.iastate.edu>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Noufal Ibrahim KV
>> <noufal at nibrahim.net.in> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm probably in the minority here but I genuinely think we should try to
>>> change the event to attract a smaller of number of
>>> good/passionate/talented/experienced people rather than a large number
>>> of people who simply drop by. The latter might have been a good idea
>>> back in the day but now with local user groups and python express, I
>>> don't think it's necessary any more.
>>
>>
>>
>> This. Word.
>
>
> +1 but we need to be wary of the criteria we employ. Taking an extreme
> example, disallowing students would also reduce the number of first timers
> and beginners significantly but it is not a good criteria to use (not to
> mention impossible to enforce).

I would be wary and disappointed if PSSI were to attempt and create a
"criteria for inclusion". I have stated (elsewhere) that PSSI would
need to decide on the nature of the conference. Such a decision would
drive the content and other associated involvement.

Students, first-time participants and everyone else should feel
equally welcome at the conference. The content of the conference does
not necessarily have to cater to everyone.

> The conference has two sets of people - presenters and audience. An
> experienced/advanced presenters would want a matching audience that can
> provide feedback. But this expectation is not hampered by the presence of
> inexperienced audience, only by the absence of experienced ones.

During conversations with various individuals at the conference I had
suggested that it would be demanded that presenters set a higher bar
than it currently is. And a way to nudge that towards reality is
having the content editing team set well defined aspirations.

> The impression of the conference is formed primarily by the presenters.
> Complaint about the Pycon has not been that people didn't meet other
> interesting people. Complaint is that the talks were lacking.

At some level this would mean that the audience is already competent
enough to (i) judge which talks were 'lacking' in a level of detail
and (ii) a significant number of the audience is
experienced/competent.

I am not sure that both of the above are correct. However, I do think
that with a 1200+ committed audience, the PSSI is in a position of
strength to try and do new things.

> So I think we should be raising the bar for the presenters. Which will in
> turn lead to self selection of audience as well (with a delay of one year).

And then the question is - what is the path to raising the bar, who
will drive it and how does it get measured to have an impact.

-- 
sankarshan mukhopadhyay
<https://twitter.com/#!/sankarshan>


More information about the Inpycon mailing list