>The conference organizers have control, in theory, but I think that they are >understandably loath to mess with the traditional mix. There is no place for >them to ask a question and get a single, cogent, authoritative answer.
Who is better to _provide_ a single authoritative answer about a conference then the conference organizers? Why would they be looking to get a single authoritative answer from someone else -- I'd assume everyone else would be looking to them! I do see how the decentralized nobody-in-charge but everybody-willing-to-complain nature of Code4Lib as a community (rather than an organization) poses some challenges. (It also provides some advantages, everything is a trade-off, although not all trade-offs are equal, and the best trade-off may change when the context changes). But, I'm not sure this is a technology/tooling problem. As we all have to remember at our day jobs too, don't look for technological product solutions to social/organizational problems. They aren't going to be successful, but you can spend a lot of resources learning that. Jonathan ________________________________________ From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] on behalf of Cary Gordon [listu...@chillco.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 2:05 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: [CODE4LIB] Communications — conference and otherwise (was: [CODE4LIB] Code4LibCon video crew thanks) This really speaks to the c4l who’s-in-charge-here / nobody is in charge / take the ball and run with it zeitgeist. We have one person — Ryan Wick — who carries most of the load for the website and the wiki. I don’t think that he, or anyone else, takes responsibility for organizing the content. From here,it looks like everything is a mix of tradition and fire prevention. Accordingly, this year we had: — The conference web pages on code4lib.org — The usual assortment of pages on wiki.code4lib.org — The newcomer dinner page on Google Docs — Stuff on Eventbrite Resulting in a mix of the usual symptoms: — No single place to find stuff — Conflicting information — Not clear editorial policy So, what do we do, and who is this “we," anyhow? The conference organizers have control, in theory, but I think that they are understandably loath to mess with the traditional mix. There is no place for them to ask a question and get a single, cogent, authoritative answer. Code4lib itself isn’t really a thing, just an us, and we have been loath to form standing committees, although we have done that after a fashion for scholarships and the Journal. I think that the time has come for a Code4lib communications task force —I love that name — to address the structure of our public-facing resources. Any takers. In lieu of blessings from an executive structure, the task force can do something with pasta to confirm its authority. Any takers? Thanks, Cary > On Feb 13, 2015, at 12:53 PM, Heller, Margaret <mhell...@luc.edu> wrote: > > I think Sarah is absolutely right that we should have updated the conference > information page with information about streaming, as I don't think most > people not attending the conference would think to look at the wiki. Even if > everyone forgot to do it during the conference that's a note to the future to > remember to do it during the conference, and I've edited the page at > http://code4lib.org/conference/2015 to give the link to the YouTube channel. > > And thanks so much video team! > > Margaret Heller > Digital Services Librarian > Loyola University Chicago > 773-508-2686 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Sarah > Weissman > Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 2:18 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4LibCon video crew thanks > > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Francis Kayiwa <kay...@pobox.com> wrote: > >> >> Planning these things is tough work with numerous moving parts. Could >> it have been posted once we were underway? Perhaps. That said there >> was 450 odd people who were there none of whom (the author included) >> thought to send a message on availability of video to this listserv. >> (I know for certain it was tweeted and re-tweeted) >> >> > > I see what you are saying. I realize that logistics are tricky. I would have > probably missed a mailing list message if it had come last minute. And I > wasn't checking Twitter in a timely manner for updates on a conference I > wasn't attending and therefore wasn't all that aware of the exact timing of. > (Perhaps this is a great time to bump that librarians list to a more visible > position in my Twitter feed...) > > And I should say that I'm glad that there is video to watch at all and > grateful to the volunteer videographers that made it happen.
