[FOSS4G2016] [Program] Trim down meeting

Wed Apr 13 01:25:09 PDT 2016

Hi Marco,

we'll accept about 180, I still need to figure out the exact number.

Cheers,
  Volker

On 04/13/2016 10:14 AM, Marco Minghini wrote:
> Dear Volker and all,
> I have almost finished reviewing the abstracts, so I have a quite clear
> picture of the topics. There are 280 abstracts in total.
> I have a simple questions: how many should be accepted?
> Thank you. Cheers,
> 
> Marco
> 
> 
> Marco Minghini, Ph.D.
> GEOlab, Politecnico di Milano - Como Campus
> via Valleggio 11, 22100 Como (Italy)
> +39 031 3327540
> marco.minghini at polimi.it <mailto:marco.minghini at polimi.it>
> @MarcoMinghini <https://twitter.com/MarcoMinghini>
> 
> 2016-04-13 10:09 GMT+02:00 Volker Mische <volker.mische at gmail.com
> <mailto:volker.mische at gmail.com>>:
> 
>     Hi Gert-Jan,
> 
>     thanks for the propositions. We'll group the talks once we know which
>     one we want to have in the program and then might kick out ones we
>     originally wanted or get some of the kicked ones in again if it fits.
> 
>     As the tagging was done by the users, I'd just use them as a help when
>     we look at the talks (it will be one huge spreadsheet). I left a few
>     comments like "case study" to the case studies so that I remember what
>     it was about when we group them.
> 
>     Cheers,
>       Volker
> 
>     On 04/13/2016 09:35 AM, Gert-Jan van der Weijden (OSGeo.nl) wrote:
>     > Hi LOC and programm committee,
>     >
>     > A few thoughts after reviewing almost 50% of the abstracts (a "review
>     > mid-term review"):
>     > - Several functional themes (indoor mapping, routing, performance
>     > testing) have a few (about 5) abstracts sent in. I think it would be
>     > valueable to sort of group them together, so you get a cluster of 2-3
>     > talks on 1 theme, instead of "isolated" talks; Which may link to the
>     > "topic talks" idea.
>     >
>     > - Same goes for the talks on FOSS as a phenomonon: e.g. the talk
>     on the
>     > diff between : "free" and "open".
>     >
>     > - A larger amount of abstracts (at least 15-20) are about "the
>     state of
>     > project XYZ". More one-way trafic (with possibly a few explanatory
>     > questions afterwards) but less discussion, I suppose.
>     > Together they are the "exhibition space of FOSS4G projects"
>     >
>     > - Next we have a lot of "best practices" open source software (and
>     often
>     > open data) applied to solve a real life problem
>     >
>     > - This year we'll have a "hyde park speakers corner" where people
>     can do
>     > a short (5 min.) talk in an open theatre style. Abstracts that
>     don't fit
>     > in the regular program may find their way to this "speakers corner";
>     >
>     >
>     > @Volker: is it possible to make a few cross-tables based on the tags
>     > that have been suplied to the abstracts?
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > regards,
>     >
>     > Gert-Jan
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > Volker Mische schreef op 10-04-2016 23:41:
>     >> Hi Program-Committee,
>     >>
>     >> not that many have filled out the Doodle yet [2], but I also
>     don't want
>     >> everyone to have block so many possible dates. As most people
>     have time
>     >> on Friday 2016-04-16 at 15:00 CEST we'll do the meeting there. I hope
>     >> that many of you (even if you haven't filled out the Doodle) will
>     join.
>     >>
>     >> Is everyone OK with trying a Goggle Hangout together with using a
>     Google
>     >> Spreadsheet to do the review? If there are objections, please
>     send me an
>     >> email and propose alternatives. I'll try to find out if I can get a
>     >> proper Hangout URL until Friday :)
>     >>
>     >> Happy reviewing till Thursday. Please be finished by then, so
>     that I can
>     >> do a final export on Friday.
>     >>
>     >> Cheers,
>     >>   Volker
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> On 04/02/2016 03:35 PM, Volker Mische wrote:
>     >>> Hi Program-Committee,
>     >>>
>     >>> there's still time to review, but we should also agree on some
>     time to
>     >>> do the actual selection. The selection process will follow the
>     steps we
>     >>> did in 2014 [1].
>     >>>
>     >>> I propose doing it the same way as in 2014, I'll prepare a Google
>     >>> Spreadsheet where I'll put the results. We will then take this as a
>     >>> basis for our discussions. We will then go through it via Google
>     >>> Hangouts/Skype/whatever you prefer. This means we need some time
>     where
>     >>> all of us have the time to do it. If someone can't participate,
>     that's
>     >>> not a big deal, but the more we are the better.
>     >>>
>     >>> I've created a Doodle [2] so that we can easily find the best time.
>     >>> Please plan for about 3h of time (if you've less time, again, no
>     >>> worries, better help a bit than not at all :) So please fill out the
>     >>> Doodle.
>     >>>
>     >>> You will then of course be able to do the reviews until we have the
>     >>> first meeting (I'll do a fresh export on the day of the meeting).
>     >>>
>     >>> We will then have a second meeting to group the talks together,
>     so it
>     >>> would be good if you have some time the week after :)
>     >>>
>     >>> [1]: http://2014.foss4g.org/abstract-review-process-for-foss4g-2014/
>     >>> [2]: http://doodle.com/poll/xriqs2asedmczdr9
>     >>>
>     >>> Cheers,
>     >>>   Volker
>     >>>
>     >> _______________________________________________
>     >> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>     >> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org>
>     >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>     _______________________________________________
>     FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>     FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org>
>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
> 
> 