My 2 cents on the voting: I think it is a novel and effective approach. Obviously most voters (aside from the committee) will not review all abstracts, usually people already have some idea what topics they are interested in, and will do a search for those, read those abstract and vote for the ones they like. So for the average voter, I think the search function (keywords and abstract contents) is most important. I do like the randomizer idea also, since you do want these voters to read a reasonable number of other abstracts too, and vote on some of those also.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Seven (aka Arnulf) <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:seven@arnulf.us">seven@arnulf.us</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>
Hash: SHA1<br>
<div class="im"><br>
Peter Batty wrote:<br>
> Like I said, it wasn't really a very serious suggestion ... I think it's<br>
> just a fact of life for the organizing committee, but it's just stressful<br>
> when there are 3 days to go to the deadline and you only have 60 abstracts<br>
> and are worried you may not have a viable conference, did we publicize<br>
> things enough, etc etc.<br>
<br>
</div>We have to face it, this is just the way it works. And it is the same<br>
everywhere. With FOSSGIS it was not that extreme but we also had 50% in<br>
the last two days. We then wanted to have more to choose from so we<br>
extended the deadline once. (We did a horrible job of advertizing the<br>
CfP up front so no wonder we had to extend the dead line).<br>
<br>
The deadline must be seriously dead. Anybody coming late lost the<br>
opportunity. Expereience also shows that if you don't meet the first<br>
deadline done chances are high you wont meet the next deadlines either<br>
or miss the whole conference. No-shows really are a pain. Get rid of<br>
them right at the beginning of the process.<br>
<br>
Paul's voting app is neat, no worries, randomizing and all included.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Arnulf<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Daniel Kastl <<a href="mailto:daniel@georepublic.de">daniel@georepublic.de</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>><br>
>> 2011/4/19 Tyler Mitchell <<a href="mailto:tmitchell@osgeo.org">tmitchell@osgeo.org</a>><br>
>><br>
>>> On 2011-04-18, at 2:42 PM, Peter Batty wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>>> Paul Ramsey is the man behind the online voting system, I'm pretty sure<br>
>>> he told me it includes randomizing the display order. Though a potential<br>
>>> future enhancement would be to have some sort of weighting for those who<br>
>>> submit earlier, to try to encourage everyone not to wait until the last day<br>
>>> :).<br>
>>><br>
>>> It's a neat idea to bring in abstracts sooner, as long as submitters know<br>
>>> there is that parameter. Wouldn't be too fair this year would it, nor would<br>
>>> it help guarantee the best quality program at this point in time at<br>
>>> least._______________________________________________<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Does it make any difference for the program committee if an abstract is<br>
>> submitted early or late? You have to wait for the last submission day<br>
>> anyway.<br>
>> I doubt that the quality of an abstract is related to the submission day.<br>
>> It's probably more the every-year-the-same presentations that are the early<br>
>> ones ;-)<br>
>><br>
>> Daniel<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>> <a href="mailto:Foss4g2011@lists.osgeo.org">Foss4g2011@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2011" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2011</a><br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan<br>
>> eMail: <a href="mailto:daniel.kastl@georepublic.de">daniel.kastl@georepublic.de</a><br>
>> Web: <a href="http://georepublic.de" target="_blank">http://georepublic.de</a><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Foss4g2011 mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Foss4g2011@lists.osgeo.org">Foss4g2011@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2011" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2011</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<div class="im">><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Foss4g2011 mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Foss4g2011@lists.osgeo.org">Foss4g2011@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2011" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2011</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>- --<br>
<div class="im">Exploring Space, Time and Mind<br>
<a href="http://arnulf.us" target="_blank">http://arnulf.us</a><br>
</div>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)<br>
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - <a href="http://enigmail.mozdev.org" target="_blank">http://enigmail.mozdev.org</a><br>
<br>
iEYEARECAAYFAk2tb8UACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b3f1ACbBqxU5Kxj2c6uHQiJAZPI1kgd<br>
jukAnA6VoTgd3zf39JpCbsuw7ioha8wz<br>
=iLxo<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
Foss4g2011 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Foss4g2011@lists.osgeo.org">Foss4g2011@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2011" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2011</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>