[Foss4g2010] Presentations and posters

[Lluís Vicens]

2010/1/29 Arnulf Christl <seven at arnulf.us>

> Volker Mische wrote:
>
>> Academic and other sessions should have the same length. But I'd vote
>> for leaving it as 25+5. In reality (at least this is how it was in 2009)
>> it was more like 20+5+5(one of):
>>  - I needed to connect my laptop
>>  - many_questions
>>  - time to move to another session
>>
>> Cheers,
>>  Volker
>>
>
> +1 to all points
>
> The half hour per presentation makes a lot of sense due to all these
> reasons. Each year there has been a lot of moving around between sessions so
> that it always starts just a few minutes late and leaving folks "end"
> sessions just a few minutes early to get late to the next presentation. My
> guess is that shortening it to 15+5 will not work at all and 20+5 gives us
> strange start and end times. And last but not least we should not outweigh
> quality with quantity. How many talks can a an attendee realistically digest
> in a day?
>

I totally agree with Arnulf and Volker. I think that 25+5 is the best
option. And as Arnulf says, we should take care about the quality because
this is more important than quantity.

lluís


>
> Regards,
> Arnulf.
>
>  Helena Mitasova wrote:
>>
>>> My suggestion was for shortening the talks for all sessions, not just
>>> academic, and as other have suggested,
>>>  15+5 is even better than 20+5 (I just did not want to sound too
>>> radical).
>>> This will make for a more dynamic conference,
>>>
>>> Helena
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 29, 2010, at 7:46 AM, Lorenzo Becchi wrote:
>>>
>>>  Paul, others,
>>>> does it make sense to have three session per hour for both academic and
>>>> not?
>>>>
>>>> The program is still flexible and this is the time to decide about it.
>>>>
>>>> we will decide inside the LOC about the 15+5 for academic, I don't see
>>>> any major problem for the moment to approve it.
>>>> It would be easier, IMO, if the program can be synchronized between
>>>> academic and not to let people easily choose their own scheduling of
>>>> presentations.
>>>>
>>>> lorenzo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 3:22 AM, Paul Ramsey <pramsey at cleverelephant.ca>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Warning: Don't balkanize the academic track by choosing a different
>>>> presentation format from the other content. If everything is
>>>> consistent, the talks can be mixed and matched into rooms depending on
>>>> expected *demand and interest* rather than artificial categories
>>>> ("it's academic").
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> P.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Venka <venka.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Helena Mitasova wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> others may have different suggestion but how about making the
>>>>>> presentations 20min + 5 min for discussion which would allow for more
>>>>>> presentations?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  +1 for academic track. I would even suggest 15min+5 as in most
>>>>> academic
>>>>> conferences where
>>>>> full paper proceedings are published.
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Foss4g2010 mailing list
>>>>> Foss4g2010 at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010
>>>>>
>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> Foss4g2010 mailing list
>>> Foss4g2010 at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foss4g2010 mailing list
>> Foss4g2010 at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010
>>
>
>
> --
> Arnulf Christl
>
> Exploring Space, Time and Mind
> http://arnulf.us/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foss4g2010 mailing list
> Foss4g2010 at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/foss4g2010/attachments/20100129/11bd7005/attachment.html