[Foss4g2009] Draft of Call for Abstracts

[mapbutcher]

+1 on Harley's comments  - he is representative of a user base, which (IMO)
we're trying to represent in our theme 'user driven'.

re: presentation timeslots. I guess we have to publicise a time slot and i
think this should be 25mins - I'm not sure that dictating 5mins here, 5 mins
there, will actually enforce what in reality will be a 30min time slot i.e
you have 30 mins to get in do your stuff, and get out before the next person
arrives for their 30mins. Every conference I have been to struggles on this
point and it eventually boils down to disciplining the overall presentation
segments i.e. 30mins - if we don't break that rule we'll be good :)

...and that brings us round to Marks point about presentation management -
I'd prefer us to have a rota established ahead of time with OC members and
other volunteers drafted to manage a set of 2/3 presentations. Given the
current program this would require:

13 session segments on day 1
9 sessions segments on day 2
11 session segments on day 3

re: submitting presentations before hand - from my experience I spend the
night before a presentation changing it (...writing it, Baden Powell was not
always true when he said 'be prepared'), then the minutes before I change it
again (because I've just sat through my presentation given by someone else)
therefore I'm not a big fan of slide submissions ahead of the presentation -
is it that difficult to walk up with a machine and swap the video? If of
course the presenter is not using their own machine then yes i think its
reasonable to ask for slides to be submitted in advance. If this is the case
I think the allocated presentation facilitator should have a machine with
the slide sets on and this should be the default back up.

re: expressing an interest in presenting or attending. An expression of
interest is very different from cold hard cash(sorry for being blunt). We
want to know how many people will present and how many people may attend,
but in reality even if people did 'express interest' this may be so far off
the mark its useless information. I'd prefer to push our efforts into
advertising, marketing, publicising, blowing off, and generally shouting
very loud indeed about the conference in a bid to get as many people to
attend as possible. Our current 'expression of interest' form goes directly
to TH

Simon


2009/3/4 Doug White <doug.royce.white at gmail.com>

> Hi Harley
>
> I strongly agree. While it is great to get the techo's together for
> workshops and tutorials. The presentations provide an avenue for business
> i.e. management to gain a better understanding of how they may leverage open
> source software.
>
> Doug White.
>
>
> Harley Prowse wrote:
>
>> Thanks Mark.
>>
>> Here I go again on my pet topic for the presentations.  I'd really like
>> to emphasise the need for a good selection of non-technical
>> presentations as well as the technical ones (which I am sure we will
>> get).  To that end, how about a few minor changes as per below...
>>
>> Presentations are open to all those interested and will provide 25
>> minutes of talk time with 5 minutes for question and answer sessions at
>> the end. All selected presentations will cover the use or development of
>> open source geospatial software.  <insert> The committee is looking for
>> a mixture of technical and non-technical presentations.
>>
>> Case Studies: Share your experiences using open source geospatial. What
>> problems were you attempting to solve? How successful were you and at
>> what cost? What can others learn from your experience? <insert> How did
>> you sell the Open Source concept to management? What was the Return on
>> Investment?
>>
>> Harley Prowse
>> www.gbs.co.nz
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: foss4g2009-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
>> [mailto:foss4g2009-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Mark Leslie
>> Sent: 3 March 2009 5:00 p.m.
>> To: foss4g2009
>> Subject: [Foss4g2009] Draft of Call for Abstracts
>>
>> I've put together a draft of the Call for Abstracts for review and
>> comment.
>>
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_2009_Press_Release_7
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foss4g2009 mailing list
> Foss4g2009 at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2009
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/foss4g2009/attachments/20090304/d7a6c591/attachment.html