On 10/2/12 3:05 AM, Barry Rowlingson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 1:01 AM, Bruce Bannerman <[email protected]> wrote:
(snip)
> it seems that we have two processes going on - what sounds
like a good talk, and who sounds like a good speaker.
(snip)
Beyond that, there is the question of selecting between talks to
establish the balance you intend.
Does the conference want to promote new, quirky, innovative, free
software projects or to market the large, established, already
successful projects? To promote the former, you might have to accept
talks by folk you do not know, by folk who have a hard time speaking
English, by folk who do not yet have the polish of the dominant players,
by folk who are younger or less in the know. Also, you might have to
limit the number of talks on dominant projects or by dominant groups.
Just picking the 'good' talks may lead the conference to once again have
many talks about the same projects that have come to dominate and fewer
talks from new talent.
Therefore picking talks only on the individual merits, whether of the
abstract, topic, or speaker, leads to a particular kind of gathering,
geared towards past success rather than towards fostering future diversity.
~adrian
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
