[FOSS4G2016] [Program] Trim down meeting

Wed Apr 13 03:28:23 PDT 2016

I am late to this discussion, apologies if this is irrelevant. 

In 2013 we got each of the selection group to rank abstracts from 1 to 100 put that into a spreadsheet alongside the community ranking and then used that as a first basis for selecting talks. We then did a second pass to avoid having individuals or companies having too many speakers (not much change) and then a third pass to enable us to do some grouping of talks (a few in and a few out at the margins). Finally we had about 10 or 12 talks that we kept on standby until we had confirmation from all of the accepted speakers that they intended to present ( a few dropped out). 

It is worth having a few standby’s even after the programme is published as you we had some infuriating let downs just before the event.

Cheers
______
Steven

> On 13 Apr 2016, at 09:25, Volker Mische <volker.mische at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 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
>> 
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016