good idea Oscar:<br><a href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_2010_Lessons_Learned">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_2010_Lessons_Learned</a><br><br>And thanks Vasile!<br><br>lorenzo<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Óscar Fonts <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:oscar.fonts.lists@gmail.com">oscar.fonts.lists@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Vasile,<br>
<br>
Add it in the wiki as 'lessons learned' for next years conferences. :)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
El 07/05/2010, a las 8:31, Vasile Craciunescu <<a href="mailto:vasile.craciunescu@gmail.com" target="_blank">vasile.craciunescu@gmail.com</a>> escribió:<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I agree with you. It's good to know even for posters witch are the most interesting titles from attendances perspective. Anyway, for practical reasons, I think the two categories of abstracts should be somehow differentiated (or placed on different pages). For example, on the review page, the voters are asked to vote for a reasonable number of titles. This is a good thing for oral presentations, where you have a psychical limit in the number of presentations a participant can attend, but this limit don't apply to posters, where a participant can see all the presentations during the breaks.<br>
<br>
Vasile<br>
<br>
Lorenzo Becchi wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
it is anyway important to us to know which are the most interesting<br>
abstract.<br>
We are planning special treatments for the most populars.<br>
lorenzo<br>
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 12:39 AM, Paul Ramsey <<a href="mailto:pramsey@cleverelephant.ca" target="_blank">pramsey@cleverelephant.ca</a>>wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
The abstract database I was given didn't distinguish between<br>
submission types. I agree that it would be good to not have rankers<br>
also wade through poster abstracts. If I can get a list of abstract<br>
identifiers for poster submissions, I can hide those from the list of<br>
abstracts people are shown.<br>
<br>
P<br>
<br>
On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 12:36 AM, Vasile Craciunescu<br>
<<a href="mailto:vasile.craciunescu@gmail.com" target="_blank">vasile.craciunescu@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Dear all,<br>
<br>
The Community Program Review page is truly great. Only one thing confuses<br>
me. It seems that the abstracts for poster are mixed with abstracts for<br>
</blockquote>
oral<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
presentation. I'm confused because there is no sign of distinction<br>
</blockquote>
between<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
this two type of proposals. On the other hand, the poster section on<br>
FOSS4G2010 website (<a href="http://2010.foss4g.org/presentations_posters.php" target="_blank">http://2010.foss4g.org/presentations_posters.php</a>)<br>
</blockquote>
says:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
"Acceptance: Posters will be accepted "first come, first served" until<br>
</blockquote>
there<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
is no more room or the deadline passes."<br>
<br>
If so, what's the point in evaluating the poster proposal?<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Vasile<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Foss4g2010 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Foss4g2010@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Foss4g2010@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
_______________________________________________<br>
Foss4g2010 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Foss4g2010@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Foss4g2010@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Foss4g2010 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Foss4g2010@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Foss4g2010@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>