subject:"Re\: Improving Diversity and Inclusion"

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-09-10 Thread David Sankel

On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 2:15 AM Doug Swallow  wrote:

> I don’t think the reason this discussion began has much merit ... I
> suspect we should really keep aware if there’s a sudden increase in C++
> conferences scheduling against each other.
>

Thanks for pointing out other factors that may have played into that
conference shutting down, but I think you're downplaying both the impact of
the scandal and the potential of C++Now facing similar issues. We've
already had a prominent Google speaker threaten to boycott the conference
and disallow Google employee participation if we did not publish a code of
conduct.

But, to your point, we should focus on diversity and inclusion because that
is what we want and it is the right thing to do rather than out of fear.

-- David

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAFYdOOLWaukNWSMHGBkCm%3D%2BHth1WU_YiXB76h8ZziCRr486U3A%40mail.gmail.com.

RE: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-09-08 Thread Doug Swallow

I don’t think the reason this discussion began has much merit. A conference in 
central Europe (Dresden Germany) scheduled for October 4-8, 2019 was canceled, 
ostensibly because some speakers made a lot of noise about the lack of anything 
but white males among speakers. (There are or were 3 women on the organizing 
committee though – well, at least in 2017 there were, since that’s all I could 
see)

Yet there’s another PHP conference literally later in the same month, also in 
Germany -- Munich. Maybe this is just a case of oversaturation of PHP 
conferences in the same geographic region. Oddly, yet another PHP conference, 
also on October 4, 2019 but in Tampa, also was canceled. Two PHP conferences on 
the same date can’t possibly be a problem, right? Who am I to say, though, 
since there’s yet another PHP conference at the same time as that one in Munich 
– PHP World in Washington DC on October 23-24, 2019.

And this late October conference in Munich? 36 white males, and 4 white women 
as speakers. Well, maybe someone doesn’t consider a Chinese woman actually in 
the category of white, but in the scheme of a photo of all speakers; still all 
white, at least as appearing in photos, if that’s someone’s worry.

Keeping a conversation about it going is always probably a good idea, but it 
should be based on the experiences we ourselves as a conference are having in 
trying to maintain/obtain as diverse a mixture of speakers, whatever the 
categories may be, that we want to have diverse mixture.

I suspect we should really keep aware if there’s a sudden increase in C++ 
conferences scheduling against each other.

--Doug.





From: boostcon-plan@googlegroups.com  On Behalf 
Of Nevin Liber
Sent: Sunday, September 8, 2019 1:36 AM
To: boostcon-plan@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 7:51 PM David Sankel 
mailto:cam...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I don't think the only two choices here are "all blind" and "all not blind". 
There are various mixtures that could work.

And it ultimately comes back to one question:  does this make it a better 
conference for attendees?

Diversity certainly makes it a better conference.  But so do great speakers.

If this were, say, a journal instead of a conference, then speaker ability 
wouldn't matter.  But it isn't.

If the submissions are blind, means that I cannot evaluate the speakers ability 
to communicate.  And that matters, especially if they are proposing a hard, 
complicated topic.

If someone is proposing a talk and I've seen them before, I know their speaking 
ability.  But I have't seen them before, I go out to the YouTube or equivalent 
links they have provided and check them out.  I won't be able to do that 
anymore.  (Note:  this doesn't mean that I reject new speakers, because we want 
to encourage that.  And I don't automatically reject a speaker who previously 
gave a poor talk if they show that they have learned from the experience.  
Etc., etc.)

Does that introduce bias?  Probably, but certainly not intentionally.  I sure 
try not to be biased when I'm evaluating submissions.

This is a large change to the criteria we use to evaluate proposals, which 
makes it a large risk to the conference itself and its reputation.
--
 Nevin ":-)" Liber  
<mailto:ne...@eviloverlord.com<mailto:ne...@eviloverlord.com>>  +1-847-691-1404
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to 
boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAGg_6%2BOnJxu7kCVfxHnXw7034TFS57J2vfkyhbomt8nN9pnqwA%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAGg_6%2BOnJxu7kCVfxHnXw7034TFS57J2vfkyhbomt8nN9pnqwA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/BN8PR12MB33645AE1D0CCE7260FD739B7AAB40%40BN8PR12MB3364.namprd12.prod.outlook.com.

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-09-07 Thread Nevin Liber

On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 7:51 PM David Sankel wrote:

> I don't think the only two choices here are "all blind" and "all not
> blind". There are various mixtures that could work.
>

And it ultimately comes back to one question: does this make it a better
conference *for attendees*?

Diversity certainly makes it a better conference. But so do great speakers.

If this were, say, a journal instead of a conference, then speaker ability
wouldn't matter. But it isn't.

If the submissions are blind, means that I cannot evaluate the speakers
ability to communicate. And that matters, especially if they are proposing
a hard, complicated topic.

If someone is proposing a talk and I've seen them before, I know their
speaking ability. But I have't seen them before, I go out to the YouTube
or equivalent links they have provided and check them out. I won't be able
to do that anymore. (Note: this doesn't mean that I reject new speakers,
because we want to encourage that. And I don't automatically reject a
speaker who previously gave a poor talk if they show that they have learned
from the experience. Etc., etc.)

Does that introduce bias? Probably, but certainly not intentionally. I
sure try not to be biased when I'm evaluating submissions.

This is a large change to the criteria we use to evaluate proposals, which
makes it a large risk to the conference itself and its reputation.
--
Nevin ":-)" Liber +1-847-691-1404

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAGg_6%2BOnJxu7kCVfxHnXw7034TFS57J2vfkyhbomt8nN9pnqwA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-09-07 Thread Robert Ramey

I would caution against over complicating the idea. I would suggest

a) anounce that submissions will be blind

b) ask reviewers to evaluate the submissions on a stand alone basis.

c) calculate their "scores" - average and/or weighted median or whatever
method you use now.

d) sort by score

Permit the selection committee - as opposed to the reviewers to unblind
the submissions and use whatever method is being used now.

So doing and tabulating reviews will be very similar to now at least as
far as the work/system is concerned. Some extra work for the selection
committee as they would likely want to check the history of the
presenters with good scores. If for some unforeseen reason it doesn't
work out - just chalk it up as a bad idea and revert to the previous
review criteria next year. Seems small risk in comparison to the
possible reward.

Possible rewards might be:

a) wider variety of submissions

b) wider variety of submitters

c) submissions might be more complete as no one can just sit back and
rely on his reputation. That is, our star presenters couldn't "phone it
in" as they can now. It might encourage them to invest more effort in
their submissions and/or shake up their complacency.

I would be very curious to see how this works out.

On 9/7/19 5:51 PM, David Sankel wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 9:23 PM Zach Laine
mailto:whatwasthataddr...@gmail.com>>
wrote:

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 1:12 PM Michael Klose
mailto:michael.kl...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I don't know how other PC members evaluate sessions. This is
how I do it: I read the submission. I google the name to see
if the speaker actually has credentials, work experience in
the area that I can find, and look for any blogs or videos
that are up online - and I actually watch those videos to see
how good of a speaker the person is. For me, seeing on video
how good of a speaker someone is forms a very large part of
how I rate the submission.

I am against blind submissions.

I am very much for them. I know they present a logistical
challenge, but there is simply no known way of eliminating bias
that is better than this.

I have a preference for this in part because I don't really rely
on the submitter's previous work; I pretty much only read the
submission.

Zach, are you in favor of blind submissions enough that you'd be
willing to take the lead on working through the logistical challenges?

I don't think the only two choices here are "all blind" and "all not
blind". There are various mixtures that could work.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAFYdOOJFi48rq-SPU4LZ7ho59ixHD2Pe6Oux7_nkKKgG_N33pQ%40mail.gmail.com
.

--
Robert Ramey
www.rrsd.com
(805)569-3793

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-09-07 Thread Zach Laine

On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 7:51 PM David Sankel  wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 9:23 PM Zach Laine 
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 1:12 PM Michael Klose 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know how other PC members evaluate sessions. This is how I do
>>> it: I read the submission. I google the name to see if the speaker actually
>>> has credentials, work experience in the area that I can find, and look for
>>> any blogs or videos that are up online - and I actually watch those videos
>>> to see how good of a speaker the person is. For me, seeing on video how
>>> good of a speaker someone is forms a very large part of how I rate the
>>> submission.
>>>
>>> I am against blind submissions.
>>>
>>
>> I am very much for them.  I know they present a logistical challenge, but
>> there is simply no known way of eliminating bias that is better than this.
>>
>> I have a preference for this in part because I don't really rely on the
>> submitter's previous work; I pretty much only read the submission.
>>
>
> Zach, are you in favor of blind submissions enough that you'd be willing
> to take the lead on working through the logistical challenges?
>
> I don't think the only two choices here are "all blind" and "all not
> blind". There are various mixtures that could work.
>

Unfortunately, no.  I'm fairly overcommitted as it is.

Zach

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CALOpkJAm6qhAZ1RPF14Ug5zDZ0Jnq4YtLM-0066rfq1dkrtQtw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-09-07 Thread David Sankel

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 9:23 PM Zach Laine 
wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 1:12 PM Michael Klose 
> wrote:
>
>> I don't know how other PC members evaluate sessions. This is how I do it:
>> I read the submission. I google the name to see if the speaker actually has
>> credentials, work experience in the area that I can find, and look for any
>> blogs or videos that are up online - and I actually watch those videos to
>> see how good of a speaker the person is. For me, seeing on video how good
>> of a speaker someone is forms a very large part of how I rate the
>> submission.
>>
>> I am against blind submissions.
>>
>
> I am very much for them.  I know they present a logistical challenge, but
> there is simply no known way of eliminating bias that is better than this.
>
> I have a preference for this in part because I don't really rely on the
> submitter's previous work; I pretty much only read the submission.
>

Zach, are you in favor of blind submissions enough that you'd be willing to
take the lead on working through the logistical challenges?

I don't think the only two choices here are "all blind" and "all not
blind". There are various mixtures that could work.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAFYdOOJFi48rq-SPU4LZ7ho59ixHD2Pe6Oux7_nkKKgG_N33pQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-09-03 Thread Jeff Hammond

*b) invest more effort in calls for papers.  This is work.  Maybe you
should seen send emails or ? to all git hub libraries with   more than
100 stars.  Or maybe to all universities with graduate programs.  Or maybe
all "big" companies which use C++. *

Please don’t do this. This is legit spam.

Jeff

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAGKz%3DuLRY1GJTpXxWrAn41Fss09dE_A6NPxxo%2B5CCfmqshHcSQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-08-29 Thread David Sankel

This I think summarizes the approaches suggested in the first article:

   1. Try to find some people outside our normal circles to take part in
   the conference, in particular speaker searching.
   2. Extensive dissemination of the code of conduct.
   3. Conference staff and volunteers are briefed on the code of conduct.
   4. Speaker lounge
   5. Live captioning
   6. Publication of a diverse (over a few dimensions) initial line-up.
   7. Speaker perks: travel, expenses, professional photo, an honorarium,
   and lots of communication.
   8. In CFP asked "under-indexed" folks to apply.
   9. Invite "diversity" speakers specifically, but tell them it is because
   of their content.
   10. Actively reach out to "affinity" groups.

My thoughts:

   - #1, #6, and #10 look interesting.
   - #2 and #3. I'm not sure about the impact, but I think they are
   important. [I've had a drastic change of feeling about these things after
   personal involvement in conduct issues recently]
   - #4 doesn't seem relevant. At C++Now there are plenty of "speaker
   lounges" (and I make use of them), but maybe we could advertise this better.
   - #5 is interesting, but is probably out of our budget
   - #7 is probably out of our budget long-term. If we start doing this,
   then speakers will expect it and our costs will go up drastically. We can
   probably do *some* stuff here.
   - #8 maybe
   - #9 is interesting, but the duplicitous aspect bothers me.



On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 4:51 PM Robert Ramey  wrote:

> When I did reviews - I read the reviewers guide.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FX-ZlgqnHRv805FYEWyTVAJNUxANP0w1y89RKF89sr4/edit
>
> But I confess I could never figure out whether I was supposed to be
> reviewing the quality of the  submission, the quality of the speaker or the
> suitability/relevance of the proposed presentation to the program.  In any
> case method below guarantees no surprises. Opinions may differ as to
> whether that's a good thing.
> On 8/28/19 11:12 AM, Michael Klose wrote:
>
> I don't know how other PC members evaluate sessions. This is how I do it:
> I read the submission. I google the name to see if the speaker actually has
> credentials, work experience in the area that I can find, and look for any
> blogs or videos that are up online - and I actually watch those videos to
> see how good of a speaker the person is. For me, seeing on video how good
> of a speaker someone is forms a very large part of how I rate the
> submission.
>
> I am against blind submissions.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:41 AM Robert Ramey  wrote:
>
>> It would cost nothing to try this for starters
>>
>> Blind submissions - I think this is one of the most important principles
>> for a diverse lineup. Every industry has its “celebrities”, the famous
>> personas that give really awesome talks everyone wants to hear. If you
>> choose the speakers only by their names and not by the content they
>> deliver, we will always see the same people giving the same talks over and
>> over again. By making the submission blind you’re giving a chance for the
>> content to speak for itself and making the persona a secondary.
>>
>> Note that for the final tweaking - they "unblind" the submissions so it's
>> a hybrid.  I think that many potential submitters are intimidated knowing
>> that will be compared with the "stars".  I would hope that this would
>> encourage more participation of those who are more out of the mainstream.
>>
>> Also, I'm not sure how much the program committee actually represents the
>> "real C++ user".  It seems that the PC is mostly C++ nerds.  Not a bad
>> thing - but not really representative of the C++ community in general.  I
>> would be curious to see some sort of investigation which shows the PC
>> rattings of a presentation vs the attendance and/or youtube views.  I've
>> been struck by my own experience:
>>
>> a) My proposals have always been accepted.
>>
>> b) I've always been disappointed by the attendence to my presentations
>>
>> c) The response to youtube videos to my presentations has generally been
>> better than average and in many case quite positive.
>>
>> I honestly don't know what to make of all this.
>>
>> CPPCon has a been a tremendous success so you guys must be doing
>> something right.
>>
>> I'm pretty convinced that diversity for diversities sake is a really,
>> really, really bad idea.
>>
>> S - to summarize:
>>
>> a) make submissions blind at least initially
>>
>> b) invest more effort in calls for papers.  This is work.  Maybe you
>> should seen send emails or ? to all git hub libraries with more than 100
>> stars.  Or maybe to all universities with graduate programs.  Or maybe all
>> "big" companies which use C++.
>>
>> Robert Ramey
>> On 8/28/19 7:29 AM, Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash wrote:
>>
>> We actually just had a discussion among some CppCon organizers about a
>> similar article:
>>
>>
>>

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-08-28 Thread Robert Ramey

When I did reviews - I read the reviewers guide.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FX-ZlgqnHRv805FYEWyTVAJNUxANP0w1y89RKF89sr4/edit

But I confess I could never figure out whether I was supposed to be
reviewing the quality of the submission, the quality of the speaker or
the suitability/relevance of the proposed presentation to the program.
In any case method below guarantees no surprises. Opinions may differ as
to whether that's a good thing.

On 8/28/19 11:12 AM, Michael Klose wrote:
I don't know how other PC members evaluate sessions. This is how I do
it: I read the submission. I google the name to see if the speaker
actually has credentials, work experience in the area that I can find,
and look for any blogs or videos that are up online - and I actually
watch those videos to see how good of a speaker the person is. For me,
seeing on video how good of a speaker someone is forms a very large
part of how I rate the submission.

I am against blind submissions.

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:41 AM Robert Ramey > wrote:

It would cost nothing to try this for starters

Blind submissions - I think this is one of the most important
principles for a diverse lineup. Every industry has its
“celebrities”, the famous personas that give really awesome talks
everyone wants to hear. If you choose the speakers only by their
names and not by the content they deliver, we will always see the
same people giving the same talks over and over again. By making
the submission blind you’re giving a chance for the content to
speak for itself and making the persona a secondary.

Note that for the final tweaking - they "unblind" the submissions
so it's a hybrid. I think that many potential submitters are
intimidated knowing that will be compared with the "stars". I
would hope that this would encourage more participation of those
who are more out of the mainstream.

Also, I'm not sure how much the program committee actually
represents the "real C++ user". It seems that the PC is mostly
C++ nerds. Not a bad thing - but not really representative of the
C++ community in general. I would be curious to see some sort of
investigation which shows the PC rattings of a presentation vs the
attendance and/or youtube views. I've been struck by my own
experience:

a) My proposals have always been accepted.

b) I've always been disappointed by the attendence to my presentations

c) The response to youtube videos to my presentations has
generally been better than average and in many case quite positive.

I honestly don't know what to make of all this.

CPPCon has a been a tremendous success so you guys must be doing
something right.

I'm pretty convinced that diversity for diversities sake is a
really, really, really bad idea.

S - to summarize:

a) make submissions blind at least initially

b) invest more effort in calls for papers. This is work. Maybe
you should seen send emails or ? to all git hub libraries with
more than 100 stars. Or maybe to all universities with graduate
programs. Or maybe all "big" companies which use C++.

Robert Ramey

On 8/28/19 7:29 AM, Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash wrote:

We actually just had a discussion among some CppCon organizers
about a similar article:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-run-inclusive-cfp-have-more-diverse-line-up-speakers-shamban/?trackingId=Fts2XkVsQoGKgd/NoWNcFw%3D%3D

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 7:24 AM David Sankel mailto:cam...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Howdy,

Some news that ya'll should be aware of:
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/27/php_europe_cancelled/

Someone shared this link with me recently with suggestions on
how to get more diversity in a conference:

https://medium.com/@geek_manager/broadening-the-responses-to-our-conference-cfp-a22f120fa941

-- David
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Google Groups "boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
it, send an email to
boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
To view this discussion on the web visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAFYdOOLHuUXY0Pmi2acf%2BdPmSfxjQO12tMR6-WVjjbcA9Ouqvg%40mail.gmail.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Google Groups "boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-08-28 Thread Michael Klose

I don't know how other PC members evaluate sessions. This is how I do it: I
read the submission. I google the name to see if the speaker actually has
credentials, work experience in the area that I can find, and look for any
blogs or videos that are up online - and I actually watch those videos to
see how good of a speaker the person is. For me, seeing on video how good
of a speaker someone is forms a very large part of how I rate the
submission.

I am against blind submissions.



On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:41 AM Robert Ramey  wrote:

> It would cost nothing to try this for starters
>
> Blind submissions - I think this is one of the most important principles
> for a diverse lineup. Every industry has its “celebrities”, the famous
> personas that give really awesome talks everyone wants to hear. If you
> choose the speakers only by their names and not by the content they
> deliver, we will always see the same people giving the same talks over and
> over again. By making the submission blind you’re giving a chance for the
> content to speak for itself and making the persona a secondary.
>
> Note that for the final tweaking - they "unblind" the submissions so it's
> a hybrid.  I think that many potential submitters are intimidated knowing
> that will be compared with the "stars".  I would hope that this would
> encourage more participation of those who are more out of the mainstream.
>
> Also, I'm not sure how much the program committee actually represents the
> "real C++ user".  It seems that the PC is mostly C++ nerds.  Not a bad
> thing - but not really representative of the C++ community in general.  I
> would be curious to see some sort of investigation which shows the PC
> rattings of a presentation vs the attendance and/or youtube views.  I've
> been struck by my own experience:
>
> a) My proposals have always been accepted.
>
> b) I've always been disappointed by the attendence to my presentations
>
> c) The response to youtube videos to my presentations has generally been
> better than average and in many case quite positive.
>
> I honestly don't know what to make of all this.
>
> CPPCon has a been a tremendous success so you guys must be doing something
> right.
>
> I'm pretty convinced that diversity for diversities sake is a really,
> really, really bad idea.
>
> S - to summarize:
>
> a) make submissions blind at least initially
>
> b) invest more effort in calls for papers.  This is work.  Maybe you
> should seen send emails or ? to all git hub libraries with more than 100
> stars.  Or maybe to all universities with graduate programs.  Or maybe all
> "big" companies which use C++.
>
> Robert Ramey
> On 8/28/19 7:29 AM, Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash wrote:
>
> We actually just had a discussion among some CppCon organizers about a
> similar article:
>
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-run-inclusive-cfp-have-more-diverse-line-up-speakers-shamban/?trackingId=Fts2XkVsQoGKgd/NoWNcFw%3D%3D
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 7:24 AM David Sankel  wrote:
>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> Some news that ya'll should be aware of:
>> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/27/php_europe_cancelled/
>>
>> Someone shared this link with me recently with suggestions on how to get
>> more diversity in a conference:
>> https://medium.com/@geek_manager/broadening-the-responses-to-our-conference-cfp-a22f120fa941
>>
>> -- David
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "boostcon-plan" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAFYdOOLHuUXY0Pmi2acf%2BdPmSfxjQO12tMR6-WVjjbcA9Ouqvg%40mail.gmail.com
>> 
>> .
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "boostcon-plan" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAP3wax-HVeWnmjbYTQhGGdJ36NNWdV9QpqO%2BxEmoAncKSe%2BtJA%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
>
> --
> Robert Rameywww.rrsd.com
> (805)569-3793
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "boostcon-plan" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/9e7a0ef8-1b6a-aaee-8c39-89b0bbf3e1fc%40rrsd.com
>

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-08-28 Thread Robert Ramey

It would cost nothing to try this for starters

Blind submissions - I think this is one of the most important principles
for a diverse lineup. Every industry has its “celebrities”, the famous
personas that give really awesome talks everyone wants to hear. If you
choose the speakers only by their names and not by the content they
deliver, we will always see the same people giving the same talks over
and over again. By making the submission blind you’re giving a chance
for the content to speak for itself and making the persona a secondary.

Note that for the final tweaking - they "unblind" the submissions so
it's a hybrid. I think that many potential submitters are intimidated
knowing that will be compared with the "stars". I would hope that this
would encourage more participation of those who are more out of the
mainstream.

Also, I'm not sure how much the program committee actually represents
the "real C++ user". It seems that the PC is mostly C++ nerds. Not a
bad thing - but not really representative of the C++ community in
general. I would be curious to see some sort of investigation which
shows the PC rattings of a presentation vs the attendance and/or youtube
views. I've been struck by my own experience:

a) My proposals have always been accepted.

b) I've always been disappointed by the attendence to my presentations

c) The response to youtube videos to my presentations has generally been
better than average and in many case quite positive.

I honestly don't know what to make of all this.

CPPCon has a been a tremendous success so you guys must be doing
something right.

I'm pretty convinced that diversity for diversities sake is a really,
really, really bad idea.

S - to summarize:

a) make submissions blind at least initially

b) invest more effort in calls for papers. This is work. Maybe you
should seen send emails or ? to all git hub libraries with more than 100
stars. Or maybe to all universities with graduate programs. Or maybe
all "big" companies which use C++.

Robert Ramey

On 8/28/19 7:29 AM, Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash wrote:
We actually just had a discussion among some CppCon organizers about a
similar article:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-run-inclusive-cfp-have-more-diverse-line-up-speakers-shamban/?trackingId=Fts2XkVsQoGKgd/NoWNcFw%3D%3D

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 7:24 AM David Sankel > wrote:

Howdy,

Some news that ya'll should be aware of:
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/27/php_europe_cancelled/

Someone shared this link with me recently with suggestions on how
to get more diversity in a conference:

https://medium.com/@geek_manager/broadening-the-responses-to-our-conference-cfp-a22f120fa941

-- David
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Groups "boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
To view this discussion on the web visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAFYdOOLHuUXY0Pmi2acf%2BdPmSfxjQO12tMR6-WVjjbcA9Ouqvg%40mail.gmail.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAP3wax-HVeWnmjbYTQhGGdJ36NNWdV9QpqO%2BxEmoAncKSe%2BtJA%40mail.gmail.com
.

--
Robert Ramey
www.rrsd.com
(805)569-3793

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

2019-08-28 Thread Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash

We actually just had a discussion among some CppCon organizers about a
similar article:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-run-inclusive-cfp-have-more-diverse-line-up-speakers-shamban/?trackingId=Fts2XkVsQoGKgd/NoWNcFw%3D%3D

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 7:24 AM David Sankel  wrote:

> Howdy,
>
> Some news that ya'll should be aware of:
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/27/php_europe_cancelled/
>
> Someone shared this link with me recently with suggestions on how to get
> more diversity in a conference:
> https://medium.com/@geek_manager/broadening-the-responses-to-our-conference-cfp-a22f120fa941
>
> -- David
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "boostcon-plan" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAFYdOOLHuUXY0Pmi2acf%2BdPmSfxjQO12tMR6-WVjjbcA9Ouqvg%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"boostcon-plan" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to boostcon-plan+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boostcon-plan/CAP3wax-HVeWnmjbYTQhGGdJ36NNWdV9QpqO%2BxEmoAncKSe%2BtJA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

RE: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

Re: Improving Diversity and Inclusion

12 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information