On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Tristan Goode <tristan@aptira.com> wrote:
So let me get this straight... You're proposing that only speakers vote for talks yeah?
Because hey, fuck the audience right?
Firstly, no need to get all sweary. Secondly, what the Foundation is proposing is that no-one gets to vote anymore at all. I wonder what that means for the audience. Thirdly, yes what I am proposing is effectively that speakers, *all* prospective speakers, vote for talks. I believe a large group of speakers, all of whom are strongly rooted in the community, in aggregate is a better judge of talk quality for the Summit than both an entire audience whose votes have no bearing on anything, and a small group of hand-picked track chairs. Fourthly, as I've tried to explain before, the review method I'm advocating does _not_ allow reviewers/speakers to review carelessly, or on a whim. In fact, it enforces that rather than thinking about your own preference of what you would like to see and listen to, you need to think along the lines of "what would everyone *else* be interested in". So no, no f*** the audience at all. Be the audience's advocate. Cheers, Florian