[Foss4g2010] Re: General track Abstract selection

[Lluís Vicens]

En/na Judit Mays ha escrit:
> Hello dear conference organisers,
>
> catching up on the abstract selection: what has been decided for how the
> selection process for general track shall work?
>
> Now that submission deadline has passed is there a vote going on
> somewhere? Who is taking part?
>   
Dear Judit,

All submitted papers will be reviewed by the members of the scientific 
committee[1] who are in charge to ensure the quality of the conference. 
They will accept (or not) submitted papers according to their knowledge 
and expertise and they will rank the abstracts according to the 
Quality/Interest for the Conference.

At the same time, we are planning to implement a public voting system. 
Volker first and Paul offered his time and an application for the 
foss4g2010 (thanks, both of you!!) so, we are deciding how to proceed to 
make this idea a reality.

We will keep you informed.
Best,

Lluís

[1] http://2010.foss4g.org/scientific.php
> Kind regards,
> Judit
>
>
>
> Lluís Vicens schrieb:
>   
>> Hi Volker and Cameron,
>>
>> Next Monday we have a meeting in Barcelona. We will discuss about this
>> issue and i will let you know our thoughts and decision. BTW, could you
>> explain us a little bit more about your script and how it could be
>> implemented before April 15th?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Lluís
>>
>>
>> En/na Volker Mische ha escrit:
>>     
>>> I should have written the "why" more explicitly. People don't (or less
>>> likely) complain when they know somebody put some thoughts in Abstract
>>> selection and that it wasn't just two buddy's making it out while having
>>> a beer.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>   Volker
>>>
>>> Volker Mische wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> is there already information about the Abstract selection of the general
>>>> (non-academic) track available? The point of this mail is not to discuss
>>>> how the selection should be, but rather that it should be transparent
>>>> how the selection process works. I don't mean that it needs to be
>>>> transparent why someone was rejected, but only how the process was that
>>>> lead to the rejection.
>>>>
>>>> I hope my intent was roughly understandable. And some people might even
>>>> understand why I think that this process needs to be transparent :)
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>   Volker
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>         
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foss4g2010 mailing list
> Foss4g2010 at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2010
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/foss4g2010/attachments/20100419/85573361/attachment.html