Open Stack

Just to be clear, track chairs have always been encouraged to use their best judgment, using the voting data as one form of input which is by no means absolute or the only form of input.  

Ultimately the track chairs make the best decision they can. That will continue in Atlanta.




On Feb 20, 2014, at 11:04 AM, Adam Nelson <adam at varud.com> wrote:

> Lots of conferences do this to boost interest and engage with the community.... but you're absolutely right.
> 
> A good compromise would be to give track leaders some magic votes to boost certain talks and veto others.
> 
> One way to implement this would be to allow tracks to have their own algorithms.  Openstack is too broad to have one method for all the talks and I think it's totally reasonable to have a default method which track chairs can override.
> 
> -Adam
> 
> --
> Kili - Cloud for Africa: kili.io
> Musings: twitter.com/varud
> More Musings: varud.com
> About Adam: www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:51 PM, Dave Neary <dneary at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Rather than just complain into the ether, I wanted to let people know
> why I don't like the voting process for conference proposals and see if
> I'm the only one.
> 
> I don't think that the voting process is the best way to gauge whether
> proposals will be good for the conference. There are a few reasons for that:
> 
> * Having to hawk & promote proposal(s) is kind of unseemly, and makes us
> look small, I think. Hundreds of people going "vote for me!" doesn't
> make us look good.
> * Some people don't want to pitch themselves, others don't have access
> to as big a platform to promote
> * The same issues exist with this system which exist with board voting -
> there is a possibility that people will vote for their colleagues, not
> out of any corruption, but just because no-one has time to rate all the
> proposals, and they're more likely to rate those submitted by people
> they know more highly
> * Also, it's a self-selecting group of people who rate proposals - I
> don't think voters will be representative of summit attendees
> * After all is said and done, the proposals which are chosen by the
> voters are guidelines to the people who choose the talks for the tracks,
> the track leaders
> 
> I have been a track leader for the last number of summits, and I've seen
> first hand great presentations get very low numbers of votes, while
> others which are not as interesting get very high numbers of votes and
> high ratings.
> 
> Personally, I would be happy if we could change the system to remove the
> "pimp my talk" aspect for Summits.
> 
> Cheers,
> Dave.
> 
> --
> Dave Neary - Community Action and Impact
> Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
> Ph: +33 9 50 71 55 62 / Cell: +33 6 77 01 92 13
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community mailing list
> Community at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community mailing list
> Community at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/community/attachments/20140220/afdc90bf/attachment.html>