[FOSS4G2016] [Program] Review system is ready

[Johan Van de Wauw]

Volker,

I notice some double submissions:
090-262 mastering security with geoserver and geofence
098-280 Getting complex feature with geoserver and hale
101-277 Geoserver in production, we do it, here is how
091-272 Raster data in geoserver
097-279 Mapping the world beyond web mercator with geoserver

and one

024 delete

Which wants to be deleted.
Perhaps this can be cleaned up before voting (perhaps they have not
used co-authors correctly, or the review system is showing them twice
if they have)? Or maybe we should vote only for the submission with
the lowest ID?

Kind Regards,
Johan

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Volker Mische <volker.mische at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Gert-Jan,
>
> this is for the Program Committee members. But of course anyone from the
> LOC can join (that was also the case in the past, where actually the
> Program Committee was mostly LOC only).
>
> The community vote is anonymous and will start next week.
>
> The difference between the Program Committee review and the community
> vote is, that if you're part of the Program Committee you will also take
> part in the final selection and not doing a simple vote only.
>
> Cheers,
>   Volker
>
> On 03/23/2016 10:31 AM, Gert-Jan van der Weijden (OSGeo.nl) wrote:
>> Hi Volker,
>>
>> I bit confused: I suppose this e-mail is intended for the
>> non-LOC-members who registered themselves as members of the
>> program-committee.
>> And thus, not for the LOC-members?
>>
>> I guess I miss the point how the roles of program committee, LOC and
>> community vote fit together.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> GJ
>>
>>
>>
>> Volker Mische schreef op 23-03-2016 9:36:
>>> Hi Program-Committee
>>>
>>> for all of you that have already sent me their usernames, the review
>>> system is ready now. For all that haven't sent me their names yet,
>>> please do, as now the real work starts :)
>>>
>>> You should now have a "Reviews" section in your dashboard (in case you
>>> don't see that let me know). You can select all talks, the ones you've
>>> already reviewed and the onces you haven't.
>>>
>>> When you click on a talk, you'll see the abstract and additional
>>> information. You can then vote on it, that's all that's needed. One you
>>> hit "submit" it will show the next abstract in the list, this should
>>> make the review as fast as possible with as little clicks as possible.
>>> If you come across your own proposals, please don't vote on them :)
>>>
>>> You can also leave a message (you don't have to) that can then be used
>>> by the committee for the final selection. My intention is that you don't
>>> give a full review, but just some notes that might be useful for the
>>> final selection process. It's for things like "I don't think that is
>>> open source" or "This sounds very similar to xyz" or to make you
>>> remember details that you want to share at the final selection. So use
>>> it sparsely as it will make the spreadsheet we do the final selection on
>>> only bigger ;)
>>>
>>> The deadline for the reviews is 2016-04-11. So please start early (in
>>> case the system has bugs) so that you really have the time to get
>>> through all the abstracts (which would be ideal).
>>>
>>> In case you wonder about the ordering. It is randomly ordered, but it's
>>> the same every time you look at it. That's just a simple way to reduce
>>> the bias a bit as all of us will have a different order.
>>>
>>> If you've any questions or find bugs or usability issues, please let me
>>> know.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>   Volker
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
> _______________________________________________
> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016