On Mar 17, 10:35 am, fumanchu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mar 16, 5:09 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) wrote: > > > fumanchu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This is my third PyCon, and I've found a reasonably-sized cadre of > > > people who come for the hallway conversations plus a Bof or two, > > > having given up on hearing anything new, useful, or inspiring in the > > > talks. There are several people I know who would like to see a more > > > advanced academic track. > > > Finally, trying to satisfy a thousand people is impossible. > > Well understood. Sorry if I implied it was an easy job. I know it > isn't. > > > If you did not like the programming this year (aside from the sponsor > > talks) and you did not participate in organizing PyCon or in delivering > > presentations, it is YOUR FAULT. PERIOD. EXCLAMATION POINT! > > This would be true, except that the two talks I proposed last year > were essentially denied because they were too advanced, so I didn't > even bother this year. Perhaps I should have, but the PERIOD needs to > at least be replaced by a COMMA as long as the talk-acceptance > committee continues to reject more advanced talk topics in favor of > HOWTOs and Introduction To Package X.
I agree - the balance wasn't as good. We can all agree that HowTos and Intros are a necessary part of the conference talks track, but as Robert pointed out some talks should be of a more advanced nature. I enjoy those that stretch my brain. Alex M, Pyke and NetworkIO and Mark Hammond's keynote were among my favorite talks. -jeff hinrichs -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
