Open Stack

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com> wrote:
> I feel like this system assumes bad faith on the part of the
> contributor (speaker, reviewer, and voter), and tries to enforce
> good behavior through rules and technology. I would rather we have
> a more public way of selecting track chairs and then have faith in
> them to evaluate talks objectively for relevance and quality, sharing
> guidance and feedback as part of the process.

Making the track chair selection process more public and open is
certainly a good thing; I also wouldn't mind for the individual
selections (shortlists) to be public. Doesn't really address Lana's
point that the sheer number of submission makes it a challenge to
review all submissions in a track diligently and carefully, but would
be an improvement.

Cheers,
Florian