[Python-ideas] Anonymizing the PyCon review process
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