I agree with in principle. It's not immediately clear what the right process would be and how to get the right balance, but it's certainly worth thinking about. The program panel is very representative and places the utmost priority to make sure that there is good consideration of all proposals. A lot of effort goes in by all of the panel members. However, even so, finding the right way to include some greater community involvement is worth doing. I don't have any concerns about the fundamental integrity of the current review process, which is very robust and has significant discussion and consideration involved.
I'd be really happy to hear about constructive feedback, including suggestions like this for improvement. Another good forum could be a "birds of a feather" discussion session at PyCon AU (or at MPUG if people would like to participate but aren't planning to come to the conference). On 3 June 2016 at 09:05, Andrew Stuart <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe in future years there might be some value in the community helping > to choose which talks get the go ahead at PyCon. > > Andrew Stuart > > > _______________________________________________ > melbourne-pug mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug > -- -------------------------------------------------- Tennessee Leeuwenburg http://myownhat.blogspot.com/ "Don't believe everything you think"
_______________________________________________ melbourne-pug mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug
