[Python-ideas] Anonymizing the PyCon review process
Stephen J. Turnbull
stephen at xemacs.org
Wed Nov 4 04:08:05 CET 2009
Raymond Hettinger writes:
> [Terry Jones]
> > The obvious suggestion is to anonymize the review process.
> FWIW, that was tried and the people complained about that too.
> Who would you rather hear speak about the future of Python, Guido
> and someone else?
> About the state of Twisted, from someone on that team or from a
> user who read the Twisted book?
> About UnladedSwallow or AppEngine, someone on Google's team or
> someone who has played around with it for a while?
That's what invited talks are for. Guido van Rossum or Alex Martelli,
you invite them to give a keynote. But you can also salt the regular
sessions with "invited" speakers. There's nothing that says that
people can't suggest themselves for invitations.
> Surely, the review process has room for improvements and better
> balance but anonymizing is a step too far IMO.
Anonymizing is the only way to get a reasonable balance between the
very short-term view you are presenting, and the long-term view of
encouraging new participants with good ideas and discouraging/warning
old-timers whose ideas and views have gone stale, or even started to
stink. Good proposals have a fairly high correlation with good talks;
although you can't expect to win them all. You don't have to
anonymize all the sessions/talks, either, but probably at least half
should be refereed blind.
More information about the Python-ideas