[Foss4g2013] Cookbook - PLEASE! (was: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] presentation selection [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]"
Arnulf Christl
arnulf.christl at metaspatial.net
Tue May 28 03:25:03 PDT 2013
Folks,
I will not tire to ask people to contribute to the OSGeo cookbook for
coming FOSS4G conferences.
This and related threads have again given a good insight into the
process and how we can improve it and avoid pitfalls. Please be so kind
to go hack that page NOW (not in 12 months time when everything is hot
again).
There is some content already at:
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Cookbook#Presentations
Please remember that this is a Wiki and everything is up for
improvement. It says "Draft, awaiting review" in some sections and this
applies to the whole cookbook (and will hopefully stay in a constant
state of flux).
Thanks,
Arnulf
On 23.05.2013 16:20, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:
> HI,
> Karel I completly agree with you: other conferences less expensive and
> even bigger provide such "service"
>
> Maxi
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Karel Charvat <charvat at ccss.cz
> <mailto:charvat at ccss.cz>> wrote:
>
> It depends on number of volunteer- revivers, usually every reader
> has responsibility for certain papers and he is making comments.
> Such number is high, but not enormous> Some conferences have more____
>
> Karel____
>
> __ __
>
> __ __
>
> *From:*b.j.kobben at utwente.nl <mailto:b.j.kobben at utwente.nl>
> [mailto:b.j.kobben at utwente.nl <mailto:b.j.kobben at utwente.nl>]
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 23, 2013 3:10 PM
> *To:* charvat at ccss.cz <mailto:charvat at ccss.cz>;
> volker.mische at gmail.com <mailto:volker.mische at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>; conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>;
> b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk <mailto:b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk>
> *Subject:* Re: [Foss4g2013] [OSGeo-Conf] presentation selection
> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]____
>
> __ __
>
> Any idea how much time putting "two three sentences" takes for > 300
> abstracts?____
>
> __ __
>
> Barend____
>
> __ __
>
> On 23-05-13 14:09, "Karel Charvat" <charvat at ccss.cz
> <mailto:charvat at ccss.cz>> wrote:____
>
> __ __
>
> Volker,____
>
> __ __
>
> Usually it is similar on any conferences that it is done by
> volunteer. But____
>
> if there is publishing system put two three sentences and this
> automatically____
>
> distributed is not so big effort____
>
> Karel____
>
> __ __
>
> __ __
>
> -----Original Message-----____
>
> From: Volker Mische [mailto:volker.mische at gmail.com] ____
>
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:57 PM____
>
> To: Karel Charvat____
>
> Cc: 'Massimiliano Cannata'; foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>;____
>
> conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>; 'Barry Rowlingson'____
>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] [Foss4g2013] presentation selection____
>
> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]____
>
> __ __
>
> Karel,____
>
> __ __
>
> I can again only speak of 2009, but back then the costs where there
> to cover____
>
> the venue and catering. There wasn't any money for the selection
> process. It____
>
> was mostly done in the freetime of the LOC members.____
>
> __ __
>
> I agree that it would be cool to have such a feedback, but it would
> need____
>
> volunteers to do so.____
>
> __ __
>
> Cheers,____
>
> Volker____
>
> __ __
>
> On 05/23/2013 01:18 PM, Karel Charvat wrote:____
>
> Dear Volker, dear others,____
>
> I start follow discussion about selection process. I have to
> say, that ____
>
> I am not very satisfied with Volkers last email.____
>
> Why? The FOSS4G fee is comparable with the costs for large
> scientific ____
>
> conferences. And usually on these conferences authors are
> obtaining ____
>
> any feedback. It is help for them not only for future, but it
> could ____
>
> help also in future development. I think, that all this could be
> done ____
>
> automatically with publishing system. I think, that the budget
> for this____
>
> has to be adequate.____
>
> Karel____
>
> -----Original Message-----____
>
> From: conference_dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:conference_dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
> [mailto:conference_dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of
> Volker ____
>
> Mische____
>
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:03 PM____
>
> To: Massimiliano Cannata____
>
> Cc: foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>;
> <conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>>; ____
>
> Barry Rowlingson____
>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] [Foss4g2013] presentation selection ____
>
> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]____
>
> Hi Maxi,____
>
> sending back the results to the authors is really a lot of work.
> There ____
>
> might be abstracts which are e.g. hardly understandable English.
> You ____
>
> will just drop those without actually assign any relevance to
> them.____
>
> The time is of the LOC is really limited and making the
> selection ____
>
> already takes hours (at least it was the case in 2009). Heaving
> even ____
>
> more overhead would be to much.____
>
> Though perhaps it would make sense to have a chance to join the ____
>
> selection process. So people who like to help out and to a
> thorough ____
>
> review can do that.____
>
> Cheers,____
>
> Volker____
>
> On 05/23/2013 12:14 PM, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:____
>
> Hi,____
>
> I agree that votes are not a guarantee of real interest. ____
>
> Suppose you work for a large company that submit an
> abstract, you ____
>
> will easily have 100 votes of all the employees but this
> does not ____
>
> mean all of them will go to the conference and that the vote
> was____
>
> "driven".____
>
> __ __
>
> At the same time, I like open and clear evaluation criteria,
> this ____
>
> avoid (or at least limit) the acceptance of talk by
> "friendship", ____
>
> that also I believe occur.____
>
> Something like evaluation rating:____
>
> 100 points maximum alssigned:____
>
> - 40 for voting rank____
>
> - 20 for foss4g project relevance____
>
> - 20 fro.... etc.____
>
> __ __
>
> All the evaluation should then be sent back to the authors.____
>
> __ __
>
> I Also would like to have some "inspiring" talk from people
> "outside"____
>
> (not only well know and great talker, than I like more
> content ____
>
> respect to shows) to better understand: what others do? How
> do they see____
>
> OSGeo?____
>
> What next? etc.____
>
> And I would like to see rotation in successive FOSS4G as
> this is the ____
>
> conference for the community, rather then for the novels to
> open ____
>
> source that may have more opportunities to enter in contact
> with open ____
>
> source in local events organized by local chapters... so I
> would like ____
>
> to see CONTENT, NEWS, VISION rather then SHOWS and APPEAL.____
>
> __ __
>
> Of course, this is only my 2 cents... ;-)____
>
> __ __
>
> Maxi____
>
> __ __
>
> __ __
>
> __ __
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Volker Mische ____
>
> <volker.mische at gmail.com <mailto:volker.mische at gmail.com>
> <mailto:volker.mische at gmail.com>
> <mailto:volker.mische at gmail.com%3e>> wrote:____
>
> __ __
>
> Hi Bart,____
>
> __ __
>
> I didn't want to be fierce, but explaining my
> experience. I____
>
> especially____
>
> felt like replying as you gave me a reality check quite
> often on____
>
> topics____
>
> where I had a completely different view in the past.____
>
> __ __
>
> My problem with the community voting is, does it really
> reflect ____
>
> what____
>
> the____
>
> community wants? I'm not saying the community is too
> stupid to ____
>
> know____
>
> what____
>
> they really one and someone else needs to decide what's
> best. I think____
>
> the problem is the open voting. It's easy to get an
> bias in there.____
>
> The____
>
> people that actually vote is a small subset of the
> people that will____
>
> be____
>
> at the conference, but the conference should please the
> whole____
>
> audience.____
>
> __ __
>
> I for example prefer developer centric talks. I don't
> care much about____
>
> talks that are about "I've used this and that open
> source ____
>
> technology____
>
> to____
>
> do x and y" or about INSPIRE. Though there are probably
> quite a few____
>
> people from institutions that don't yet use an open
> source stack ____
>
> or____
>
> want____
>
> to learn how to leverage open source when they need to
> meet the____
>
> INSPIRE____
>
> goals. It would be valuable to have such presentations.
> This is ____
>
> what____
>
> the____
>
> LOC is for, they can make the call to include those as
> well.____
>
> __ __
>
> Another example which is a bit artificial, it's about
> popular____
>
> presenters. Let's take Paul Ramsey as an example, he's
> one of the____
>
> best____
>
> speakers I've ever been to at conferences. If he would
> submit 10____
>
> talks,____
>
> probably all of them would get voted by the community
> (being it due____
>
> to____
>
> great abstracts or to know that Paul is presenting).
> But of course____
>
> you____
>
> don't want to have one person doing to many talks.____
>
> __ __
>
> And finally the problem of people trying to abuse the
> public vote (or____
>
> have friends that try it). You can filter those out
> sometimes, ____
>
> but____
>
> would____
>
> you then publish the filtered results or the raw data?____
>
> __ __
>
> Though I think it's good to have this discussion. These
> thoughts have____
>
> previously only in my brain and never written down. So
> it hopefully____
>
> helps for future conferences to improve the process.____
>
> __ __
>
> Cheers,____
>
> Volker____
>
> __ __
>
> __ __
>
> On 05/23/2013 06:51 AM, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:____
>
> > Given the fierce responses, I will think twice about
> ever making a____
>
> suggestion on a selection process for FOSS4G again.
> Sorry to have____
>
> spend my time on this.____
>
> >____
>
> > Bart____
>
> >____
>
> > Sent from my iPhone____
>
> >____
>
> > On May 23, 2013, at 1:59 AM, Bruce Bannerman____
>
> <B.Bannerman at bom.gov.au <mailto:B.Bannerman at bom.gov.au>
> <mailto:B.Bannerman at bom.gov.au>
> <mailto:B.Bannerman at bom.gov.au%3e>> wrote:____
>
> >____
>
> >> Thanks Volker.____
>
> >>____
>
> >> Agreed.____
>
> >>____
>
> >> Can I suggest that if someone believes that they
> have a better____
>
> process, that they volunteer for the LOC of the next
> international____
>
> FOSS4G conference and try it then?____
>
> >>____
>
> >> Bruce____
>
> >>____
>
> >> ____________________________________________
>
> >> From: foss4g2013-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:foss4g2013-bounces at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
> <mailto:foss4g2013-bounces at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
> [foss4g2013-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:foss4g2013-bounces at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
> <mailto:foss4g2013-bounces at lists.osgeo.org>
> <mailto:foss4g2013-bounces at lists.osgeo.org%3e>] On Behalf Of
> Volker____
>
> Mische [volker.mische at gmail.com
> <mailto:volker.mische at gmail.com>
> <mailto:volker.mische at gmail.com>
> <mailto:volker.mische at gmail.com%3e>]____
>
> >> Sent: Thursday, 23 May 2013 1:04 AM____
>
> >> To: Bart van den Eijnden____
>
> >> Cc: foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
> <mailto:foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>;
> <conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
> <mailto:conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>
> <mailto:conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org%3e>>; Barry
> Rowlingson____
>
> >> Subject: Re: [Foss4g2013] presentation selection____
>
> >>____
>
> >> Bart,____
>
> >>____
>
> >> I second the approach that was used by the LOC. It's
> similar to____
>
> what was____
>
> >> done in 2009 (when I was part of it).____
>
> >>____
>
> >> Barry described how they made the selection in
> detail. It is____
>
> important____
>
> >> that the way the decision was made is transparent,
> not the____
>
> decisions____
>
> >> themselves (it would take way to much to give a
> reason for ____
>
> every____
>
> not____
>
> >> accepted abstract).____
>
> >>____
>
> >> The LOC should make the final call and normally it's
> pretty ____
>
> close____
>
> to____
>
> >> what the community voted for (at least that was the
> case in 2009).____
>
> >>____
>
> >> Cheers,____
>
> >> Volker____
>
> >>____
>
> >>____
>
> >> On 05/22/2013 04:58 PM, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:____
>
> >>> Barry,____
>
> >>>____
>
> >>> does this mean you don't have enough trust in the
> community____
>
> voting that____
>
> >>> they will filter out anything inappropriate?____
>
> >>>____
>
> >>> I see this as an unnecessary and confusing step.____
>
> >>>____
>
> >>> Best regards,____
>
> >>> Bart____
>
> >>>____
>
> >>> --____
>
> >>> Bart van den Eijnden____
>
> >>> OSGIS - http://osgis.nl____
>
> >>>____
>
> >>> On May 22, 2013, at 4:50 PM, Barry Rowlingson____
>
> >>> <b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk
> <mailto:b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk>____
>
> <mailto:b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk>____
>
> <mailto:b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk____
>
> <mailto:b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk>>
> <mailto:b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk%3e%3e>> wrote:____
>
> >>>____
>
> >>>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Bart van den
> Eijnden____
>
> >>>> <bartvde at osgis.nl <mailto:bartvde at osgis.nl>
> <mailto:bartvde at osgis.nl>____
>
> <mailto:bartvde at osgis.nl <mailto:bartvde at osgis.nl>>
> <mailto:bartvde at osgis.nl%3e%3e>> wrote:____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>>> But apparently the selection committee filtered
> out abstracts____
>
> based____
>
> >>>>> on the____
>
> >>>>> words open and or free, which seems a weird and
> error-prone____
>
> approach____
>
> >>>>> to me.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>> We did *not* purely filter out based on words.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>> We looked at the title, short abstract, and long
> abstract. ____
>
> If____
>
> from____
>
> >>>> those items we could not see a free/open-source,
> open-data, or____
>
> >>>> geospatial angle, we *thought carefully* about
> whether that____
>
> should be____
>
> >>>> included in the conference.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>>> My second talk was about GeoExt and since I
> thought since____
>
> everybody knows____
>
> >>>>> GeoExt is about open source, I did not mention
> those words____
>
> explicitly____
>
> >>>>> in my____
>
> >>>>> abstract.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>> Yes, we have enough expertise on the panel to know
> our open____
>
> source____
>
> >>>> packages. Anything we didn't know, we looked up.
> However we____
>
> can't look____
>
> >>>> up something omitted from an abstract...____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>>> Someone had a great abstract on big data, but it
> wasn't____
>
> selected____
>
> >>>>> because it can be used with both open source
> software and____
>
> closed source____
>
> >>>>> software, and it's not about open data
> specifically.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>> An abstract that doesn't mention any open
> geospatial technology____
>
> could____
>
> >>>> well be about doing analysis in ArcGIS or Oracle
> Spatial. Its____
>
> not the____
>
> >>>> committee's job to second-guess the presenter or
> ask the____
>
> presenter for____
>
> >>>> clarification - the abstract is space enough to
> provide ____
>
> clarity____
>
> and____
>
> >>>> full details.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>>> My personal opinion is____
>
> >>>>> that if the general public wants to see this
> talk, it should____
>
> not____
>
> >>>>> matter if____
>
> >>>>> the abstract contains the words free or open.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>> Again, we did not filter on the words. We took the
> totality ____
>
> of____
>
> the____
>
> >>>> submission and checked appropriateness for the
> Free and Open____
>
> Source____
>
> >>>> for Geospatial Conference, amongst the other
> criteria.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>>> Also, if this is filtering would be done, it
> should be done____
>
> *prior*____
>
> >>>>> to the____
>
> >>>>> community voting phase IMHO.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>> Personal opinion: there's no point - the outcome
> will be the____
>
> same, it____
>
> >>>> will just require a committee to review everything
> before ____
>
> and____
>
> after____
>
> >>>> the community voting. There were very few
> inappropriate____
>
> submissions.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>>> Can the selection committee elaborate on the
> approach they____
>
> used?____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>> I think we've discussed this at great lengths on
> this and other____
>
> >>>> mailing lists. Basically: First pass: include
> community vote____
>
> top 100.____
>
> >>>> Second pass: include committee vote top 100
> (giving us ~130____
>
> included).____
>
> >>>> Discuss, eliminate anything inappropriate. Next
> pass: ____
>
> include____
>
> lower____
>
> >>>> ranked community votes. Next: lower ranked
> committee votes.____
>
> Check for____
>
> >>>> multiple submissions, similarities with workshop
> sessions, and____
>
> make a____
>
> >>>> decision on near-duplicates (which may include
> rejections,____
>
> choices, or____
>
> >>>> mergers). Keep going until coffee runs out or all
> slots filled.____
>
> We did____
>
> >>>> not run out of coffee.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>> I think fuller details will be posted to the
> lessons____
>
> learned/cookbook____
>
> >>>> wiki pages.____
>
> >>>>____
>
> >>>> Barry____
>
> >>>____
>
> >>>____
>
> >>>____
>
> >>> ___________________________________________________
>
> >>> Foss4g2013 mailing list____
>
> >>> Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>
> <mailto:Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
> >>>
> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2013____
>
> >>____
>
> >> ___________________________________________________
>
> >> Foss4g2013 mailing list____
>
> >> Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>
> <mailto:Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
> >>
> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2013____
>
> __ __
>
> ___________________________________________________
>
> Foss4g2013 mailing list____
>
> Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>
> <mailto:Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
>
> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2013____
>
> __ __
>
> __ __
>
> __ __
>
> __ __
>
> --____
>
> *Massimiliano Cannata*____
>
> __ __
>
> Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica____
>
> __ __
>
> Responsabile settore Geomatica____
>
> __ __
>
> __ __
>
> Istituto scienze della Terra____
>
> __ __
>
> Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design____
>
> __ __
>
> Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana____
>
> __ __
>
> Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio____
>
> __ __
>
> Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14________
>
> __ __
>
> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09________
>
> __ __
>
> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
> <mailto:massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>
> <mailto:massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>____
>
> __ __
>
> _www.supsi.ch/ist <http://www.supsi.ch/ist>
> <http://www.supsi.ch/ist>_ <http://www.supsi.ch/ist%3e_>____
>
> __ __
>
> ___________________________________________________
>
> Conference_dev mailing list____
>
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> <mailto:Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev____
>
> ____
>
> __________ Informace od ESET Smart Security, verze databaze 8364
> ____
>
> (20130523) ______________
>
> Tuto zpravu proveril ESET Smart Security.____
>
> http://www.eset.cz____
>
> ____
>
> ____
>
> __________ Informace od ESET Smart Security, verze databaze 8364
> ____
>
> (20130523) ______________
>
> Tuto zpravu proveril ESET Smart Security.____
>
> http://www.eset.cz____
>
> ____
>
> __ __
>
> __________ Informace od ESET Smart Security, verze databaze 8364
> (20130523)____
>
> ______________
>
> __ __
>
> Tuto zpravu proveril ESET Smart Security.____
>
> __ __
>
> http://www.eset.cz____
>
> __ __
>
> __________ Informace od ESET Smart Security, verze databaze 8364
> (20130523)____
>
> ______________
>
> __ __
>
> Tuto zpravu proveril ESET Smart Security.____
>
> __ __
>
> http://www.eset.cz____
>
> __ __
>
> ___________________________________________________
>
> Foss4g2013 mailing list____
>
> Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>____
>
> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2013____
>
> __ __
>
>
>
> __________ Informace od ESET Smart Security, verze databaze 8365
> (20130523) __________
>
>
>
> Tuto zpravu proveril ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.cz____
>
>
>
> __________ Informace od ESET Smart Security, verze databaze 8365
> (20130523) __________
>
>
> Tuto zpravu proveril ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.cz
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foss4g2013 mailing list
> Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org>
> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2013
>
>
>
>
> --
> *Massimiliano Cannata*
>
> Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica
>
> Responsabile settore Geomatica
>
>
> Istituto scienze della Terra
>
> Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design
>
> Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana
>
> Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio
>
> Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14____
>
> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09____
>
> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch <mailto:massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>
>
> _www.supsi.ch/ist <http://www.supsi.ch/ist>_
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foss4g2013 mailing list
> Foss4g2013 at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2013
>
--
Arnulf Christl (Executive Director)
Open Source Geospatial Software, Data and Services
http://www.metaspatial.net
More information about the Foss4g2013
mailing list