Brad Roberts wrote:
On Tue, 12 May 2009, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
The stars are aligning themselves very nicely for a second D conference.
However, I would like to suggest a few changes this time around that are aimed
at improving the quality of the conference.
* All submissions will be reviewed by a committee. They must be presented at
least as abstract + slides for review. The committee will reject weak
submissions even though there might be "space" left. No more "I think I can
slap together something" this time around.
Two or whatever years ago, I was _lucky_ to get enough speakers to justify
having the conference. I see no reason to expect that there will suddenly
be a wealth of them such that proposed talks could be rejected. That'd be
a wonderful place to be.
The more people that get to hear the "call for papers", the more stuff
you have to choose from. Also helping, motivating, and enabling more
people to (or even try to) write papers, increases the likelihood that a
half dozen of them are adequate.
* The conference should not be free. This may seem odd, but I am convinced
that a non-free conference will end up being better than a free one. There
will be a cost that's reasonable but non-null. Speakers will get appropriate
discounts and transportation reimbursements, which encourages competitiveness
and also allows us to bring an outside authority for e.g. a keynote talk.
Given the cost of attendance (airfare, lodging, etc), I'm reluctant to put
additional barriers in place.
There are two kinds of attendees. Those who do D on their own, and then
those who come paid by their employers. (Many of which don't even tinker
with D, but who represent communities that are interested of D, or just
in general want to stay up to date.)
For the latter, it may even be easier to get funding, if the conference
costs even 30% of the airfare + lodging cost. (Yes, I'm digging my own
grave here, but it's D's cause I'm furthering here, not my own. And yes,
that makes me stupid, agreed.)
But I wouldn't say no to the idea. I'll
point out that last year some of the speakers who couldn't have otherwise
attended were assisted flown in. What you're really saying is that there
needs to be a budget. That doesn't imply cost to attend, though it would
certainly help.
* We should put together one or more panels. I personally don't care much for
panels/roundtables/etc., but somehow most people love them. For the state of D
in particular, I believe the panel format will be very appropriate.
I agree. I love panel discussions as they become actual discussions
rather than presentations with Q/A sprinkled in or after.
In short, I'd like to hold a real, good-quality conference.
I'm all for this, but I'd quibble about the definition.
Later,
Brad
