[OSGeo-Conf] Re: [mapserver-dev] GeoServer superseeding MapServer in Europe?

[Eric Wolf]

The Association of American Geographers (AAG) has been trying to limit
people to one presentation, panel or poster. Their's is more a logistical
problem. It's very hard to find a venue that can handle 8000+ attendees and
even harder to coordinate presentations sessions in a way that makes sense.
Limiting each person to one presentation is reasonable.

Another way we can "borrow" from AAG is to have themed sessions with their
own organizers. The organizer will submit a proposal for a session (4
presentations). Presenters can specify that their presentation is for a
specific session. Then the organizer picks and chooses which are best. Alex
did this at AAG in Las Vegas and was allocated two sessions (8
presentations) and a discussion panel.

-Eric

-=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=-
Eric B. Wolf                    New! 720-334-7734
USGS Geographer
Center of Excellence in GIScience
PhD Student
CU-Boulder - Geography

GPG Public Key: http://www.h4h.net/ebwolf.public.key.txt


On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Paul Ramsey <pramsey at opengeo.org> wrote:

> People annoyed their talk wasn't selected: News at 11.
>
> 120 slots, 360 talks. I thought the LOC did as well as they could
> integrating the community scores (which were heavily biased towards
> technology talks on "popular things") with their own judgements, given
> that they were going to have to reject 2 of every 3 submissions.
>
> We could institute an only-one-talk-per-person policy, it would
> certainly help revenues (right Cameron? :) There will still be
> interesting talks rejected and people annoyed though. I think further
> discriminating (as a policy) based on organizational affiliation is a
> bridge too far though, if I may put a self-interested oar in.
>
> P.
>
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Daniel Morissette
> <dmorissette at mapgears.com> wrote:
> > <off_topic>
> > Since you opened the FOSS4G selection process can of worms, I am of the
> > opinion that the current FOSS4G selection process has some problems and
> > needs some work, as demonstrated by the fact that several
> > people/organizations got multiple talks, while at the same time several
> > others with less prominent names got turned down with very interesting
> > proposals. I got comments from several people about that after the
> > FOSS4G selection results were announced.
> > </off_topic>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20100707/2587f199/attachment.html