[Python-ideas] Anonymizing the PyCon review process

Jesse Noller jnoller at gmail.com
Wed Nov 4 04:38:29 CET 2009

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:
> 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.

Invited speakers are invited, they don't self nominate. If you have
suggestions to change this, please join the pycon mailing list(s).

> 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.

I encourage you to participate in Pycon organization next year. This
is not the proper forum.


More information about the Python-ideas mailing list