Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
Would theperson responsible for the registration site contact me offlist, please? Thanks, -- Regina Beach-Bertin Decatur, Georgia 30030 Phone: (678) 964-7125 E-Mail: r.beach.ber...@gmail.com On 2/22/2015 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
Thanks, Ryan! Ralph -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Wick, Ryan Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 4:51 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: Vote for Code4lib 2016 location I just activated your account, Ralph, so you should be all set. Yes, 24 hours is normal to wait, even during conference voting I only check for new accounts about once a day. Ryan Wick -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of LeVan,Ralph Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 1:47 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location I have never successfully gotten an ID and I seem to be failing again. Is 24hrs a normal amount of time to have to wait for authorization? (Not complaining, exactly, just wondering. I'd have sent this note to an administrator if there were any indication of who that might be on the Conference Proposals page or the registration page.) Thanks! Ralph -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Francis Kayiwa Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2015 8:48 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A: Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q: Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
I just activated your account, Ralph, so you should be all set. Yes, 24 hours is normal to wait, even during conference voting I only check for new accounts about once a day. Ryan Wick -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of LeVan,Ralph Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 1:47 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location I have never successfully gotten an ID and I seem to be failing again. Is 24hrs a normal amount of time to have to wait for authorization? (Not complaining, exactly, just wondering. I'd have sent this note to an administrator if there were any indication of who that might be on the Conference Proposals page or the registration page.) Thanks! Ralph -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Francis Kayiwa Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2015 8:48 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A: Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q: Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
I have never successfully gotten an ID and I seem to be failing again. Is 24hrs a normal amount of time to have to wait for authorization? (Not complaining, exactly, just wondering. I'd have sent this note to an administrator if there were any indication of who that might be on the Conference Proposals page or the registration page.) Thanks! Ralph -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Francis Kayiwa Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2015 8:48 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A: Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q: Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
We're voting on the content of the proposals given. I don't think anyone really believes everything is set in stone for anything except that there are 2 very dedicated groups willing to put on a conference in their respective cities. There are probably more people voting for one or the other based on $$$ and transportation than multi/single track. It's not really about the minutia of the conference, it's the locations themselves. Sarah Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 20:48:58 + From: christina.sala...@csuci.edu Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU I think I see what you're saying - it's not really the location of the conference that we're voting on: it's the location plus the capability of the planners to put on a conference, plus whatever the plans that have been outlined in the case that those plans HAVE in fact been outlined and COMMITTED to. My concern though is that we'd be voting on too many different aspects of the conference itself simultaneously and some of it unknown and subject to change in any case. Being on the LA proposal group, I don't think we committed to a single track, especially since Josh offered other options here on this list. We are in fact open to changing this part based on what people are interested in here. I'd hate for people to think Philly = multi track, LA = single. So in truth we're not really VOTING on that aspect in any case (discussing is another matter). So what I really meant to say originally is it'd be good to know what we're voting ON (does that make any of what I'm trying to say less obnoxious? Equal was certainly a poor choice of words and not what I'd actually intended) but I would argue that in fact we STILL REALLY don't know what we're voting on because it's subject to the discretion of the planning committee as they see fit in planning the conference and based on community feedback now and in the near future. Christina Salazar Systems Librarian John Spoor Broome Library California State University, Channel Islands 805/437-3198 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Esmé Cowles Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:45 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location I think now is exactly the right time to talk about this -- when we have multiple hosting proposals to choose from. Adding some multi-track sessions, like making the conference significantly larger, is controversial, and people can vote based on that. I am also torn between different factors (weather, trying some multi-track sessions, travel considerations, etc.), but that's always the case when deciding on hosting proposals. -Esme On 02/23/15, at 11:36 AM, Salazar, Christina christina.sala...@csuci.edu wrote: What Josh said: In a multi-track, you are forced to choose and never get to see what is going on in the areas that you've been forced to opt out of. Which I think would be a shame since some of the non-technical talks really NEED to be heard by those who are there purely for the tech. I do think someone from Philly needs to answer the original question: can they put on a single track conference if that's what the community wants. It will make a difference it seems, in the vote. Then if BOTH LA and Philly can do single track (or multitrack or some other permutation) we can vote on each city as equals. This way we don't need to debate the merits of single or multitrack at the same time as we're debating the merits of LA versus Philly. Christina Salazar Systems Librarian John Spoor Broome Library California State University, Channel Islands 805/437-3198 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Joshua Gomez Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:31 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Allowing for focus via multi-track also enables echo chambers in which people that could probably most benefit from non-code related talks never see them. As a possible solution, we could have a post-conference afternoon on Thursday where people could meet to dig deeper into themes that occurred during the general session. Similar to what happened this year with the breakouts at the end, but with a little more emphasis and organization. -Josh Joshua Gomez | Sr. Software Engineer Getty Research Institute | Los Angeles, CA 310-440-7421 Frumkin, Jeremy A - (frumkinj) frumk...@email.arizona.edu 02/23/15 11:19 AM A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
I think I see what you're saying - it's not really the location of the conference that we're voting on: it's the location plus the capability of the planners to put on a conference, plus whatever the plans that have been outlined in the case that those plans HAVE in fact been outlined and COMMITTED to. My concern though is that we'd be voting on too many different aspects of the conference itself simultaneously and some of it unknown and subject to change in any case. Being on the LA proposal group, I don't think we committed to a single track, especially since Josh offered other options here on this list. We are in fact open to changing this part based on what people are interested in here. I'd hate for people to think Philly = multi track, LA = single. So in truth we're not really VOTING on that aspect in any case (discussing is another matter). So what I really meant to say originally is it'd be good to know what we're voting ON (does that make any of what I'm trying to say less obnoxious? Equal was certainly a poor choice of words and not what I'd actually intended) but I would argue that in fact we STILL REALLY don't know what we're voting on because it's subject to the discretion of the planning committee as they see fit in planning the conference and based on community feedback now and in the near future. Christina Salazar Systems Librarian John Spoor Broome Library California State University, Channel Islands 805/437-3198 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Esmé Cowles Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:45 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location I think now is exactly the right time to talk about this -- when we have multiple hosting proposals to choose from. Adding some multi-track sessions, like making the conference significantly larger, is controversial, and people can vote based on that. I am also torn between different factors (weather, trying some multi-track sessions, travel considerations, etc.), but that's always the case when deciding on hosting proposals. -Esme On 02/23/15, at 11:36 AM, Salazar, Christina christina.sala...@csuci.edu wrote: What Josh said: In a multi-track, you are forced to choose and never get to see what is going on in the areas that you've been forced to opt out of. Which I think would be a shame since some of the non-technical talks really NEED to be heard by those who are there purely for the tech. I do think someone from Philly needs to answer the original question: can they put on a single track conference if that's what the community wants. It will make a difference it seems, in the vote. Then if BOTH LA and Philly can do single track (or multitrack or some other permutation) we can vote on each city as equals. This way we don't need to debate the merits of single or multitrack at the same time as we're debating the merits of LA versus Philly. Christina Salazar Systems Librarian John Spoor Broome Library California State University, Channel Islands 805/437-3198 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Joshua Gomez Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:31 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Allowing for focus via multi-track also enables echo chambers in which people that could probably most benefit from non-code related talks never see them. As a possible solution, we could have a post-conference afternoon on Thursday where people could meet to dig deeper into themes that occurred during the general session. Similar to what happened this year with the breakouts at the end, but with a little more emphasis and organization. -Josh Joshua Gomez | Sr. Software Engineer Getty Research Institute | Los Angeles, CA 310-440-7421 Frumkin, Jeremy A - (frumkinj) frumk...@email.arizona.edu 02/23/15 11:19 AM A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals. 2) Separate from either proposal, I was struck this year by a greater diversity in topic areas for code4lib than I have observed in the past. There definitely felt like there was interest in tracks that were not as code-focused (such as culture / community, management, etc.). With the conference growing to the size it has, I personally feel it might be interesting to try a hybrid of single / multi-track, to allow those attending an opportunity to have the ability to have some additional focus on some theme areas. When we started code4lib, the size of the conference was such that a single track made a lot of sense; as the event has grown, both in size and maturity, I'd like to suggest
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
I want to be helpful so I fill that part in, if we can extrapolate from current conditions: Philadelphia high tomorrow - 26 degrees Los Angeles high tomorrow - 74 degrees You know, just to be helpful... Christina Salazar Systems Librarian John Spoor Broome Library California State University, Channel Islands 805/437-3198 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Eric Hellman Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 10:47 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location These are both great but the Philly folks seem to have forgotten the Weather section. On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A:Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q:Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals. 2) Separate from either proposal, I was struck this year by a greater diversity in topic areas for code4lib than I have observed in the past. There definitely felt like there was interest in tracks that were not as code-focused (such as culture / community, management, etc.). With the conference growing to the size it has, I personally feel it might be interesting to try a hybrid of single / multi-track, to allow those attending an opportunity to have the ability to have some additional focus on some theme areas. When we started code4lib, the size of the conference was such that a single track made a lot of sense; as the event has grown, both in size and maturity, I'd like to suggest that it may be worth exploring having both single track sessions and multi-track sessions to allow deeper dives by different segments of the attendees. Just my $.02 -- jaf --- Jeremy Frumkin Assistant Dean / Chief Technology Strategist University of Arizona Libraries +1 520.626.7296 j...@arizona.edu A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. - Albert Einstein On 2/23/15, 12:09 PM, Riley Childs rchi...@cucawarriors.com wrote: I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy. This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not one of the named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. Thank you for your compliance. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it nor any attachments may be reproduced, adapted, forwarded or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright ow...@cucawarriors.com From: Collier, Aaronmailto:acoll...@calstate.edu Sent: ?2/?23/?2015 2:08 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDUmailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location In conjunction with the distributed location pre-conferences AND multi-track the proposal is not very appealing. -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Fox, Bobbi Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 10:51 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Is there wiggle room on the Philadelphia multiple track proposal, or do those of us who would prefer single track only have the [not]choice of voting for L.A.? Best regards, Bobbi On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A: Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q: Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
These are both great but the Philly folks seem to have forgotten the Weather section. On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A:Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q:Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
Is there wiggle room on the Philadelphia multiple track proposal, or do those of us who would prefer single track only have the [not]choice of voting for L.A.? Best regards, Bobbi On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A: Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q: Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
In conjunction with the distributed location pre-conferences AND multi-track the proposal is not very appealing. -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Fox, Bobbi Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 10:51 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Is there wiggle room on the Philadelphia multiple track proposal, or do those of us who would prefer single track only have the [not]choice of voting for L.A.? Best regards, Bobbi On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A: Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q: Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy. This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not one of the named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. Thank you for your compliance. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it nor any attachments may be reproduced, adapted, forwarded or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright ow...@cucawarriors.com From: Collier, Aaronmailto:acoll...@calstate.edu Sent: 2/23/2015 2:08 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDUmailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location In conjunction with the distributed location pre-conferences AND multi-track the proposal is not very appealing. -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Fox, Bobbi Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 10:51 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Is there wiggle room on the Philadelphia multiple track proposal, or do those of us who would prefer single track only have the [not]choice of voting for L.A.? Best regards, Bobbi On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A: Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q: Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
I definitely feel it is time for a hybrid. My thoughts: How about an hour's worth of breakouts sessions each day? One idea. -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Frumkin, Jeremy A - (frumkinj) Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 2:18 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals. 2) Separate from either proposal, I was struck this year by a greater diversity in topic areas for code4lib than I have observed in the past. There definitely felt like there was interest in tracks that were not as code-focused (such as culture / community, management, etc.). With the conference growing to the size it has, I personally feel it might be interesting to try a hybrid of single / multi-track, to allow those attending an opportunity to have the ability to have some additional focus on some theme areas. When we started code4lib, the size of the conference was such that a single track made a lot of sense; as the event has grown, both in size and maturity, I'd like to suggest that it may be worth exploring having both single track sessions and multi-track sessions to allow deeper dives by different segments of the attendees. Just my $.02 -- jaf --- Jeremy Frumkin Assistant Dean / Chief Technology Strategist University of Arizona Libraries +1 520.626.7296 j...@arizona.edu A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. - Albert Einstein On 2/23/15, 12:09 PM, Riley Childs rchi...@cucawarriors.com wrote: I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy. This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not one of the named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. Thank you for your compliance. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it nor any attachments may be reproduced, adapted, forwarded or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright ow...@cucawarriors.com From: Collier, Aaronmailto:acoll...@calstate.edu Sent: ?2/?23/?2015 2:08 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDUmailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location In conjunction with the distributed location pre-conferences AND multi-track the proposal is not very appealing. -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Fox, Bobbi Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 10:51 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Is there wiggle room on the Philadelphia multiple track proposal, or do those of us who would prefer single track only have the [not]choice of voting for L.A.? Best regards, Bobbi On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A: Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q: Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
Eric, There is no weather is Philly, just despair. ;-) On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Eric Hellman e...@hellman.net wrote: These are both great but the Philly folks seem to have forgotten the Weather section. On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A:Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q:Who were the Democratic presidential candidates? -- Tod Robbins Digital Asset Manager, MLIS todrobbins.com | @todrobbins http://www.twitter.com/#!/todrobbins
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
Even though Code4Lib is single-track, I readily admit: I do not see all of the presentations as they're happening. (I talk to people, I nap, I do the introvert thing and hide with a cup of tea, or whatever.) I know I'm not the only one. And I do go back to YouTube and watch some of the ones I missed, but I also zoom-forward through the ones that are less interesting to me. So I think we've got more self-selection happening, already, than we let on. Aren't we still pretty committed to recording all of the talks (with permission), whether we stay single-track or move to multi-track, or do some hybrid? I agree with the calls to be respectful and kind to both of the proposing committees, who have put in a bunch of work and are both clearly willing to put in a bunch more. The best way to express our opinions is by voting in the poll: http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37, but the second-best way is politely, respectfully, and with some serious thought as to how they might sound to someone whose hard work and thinking we're potentially dismissing. Re-read your messages from the perspective of both hosting committees before you send them, please! (This probably requires reading both of the proposal documents, by the way. :)) - Coral On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Salazar, Christina christina.sala...@csuci.edu wrote: What Josh said: In a multi-track, you are forced to choose and never get to see what is going on in the areas that you've been forced to opt out of. Which I think would be a shame since some of the non-technical talks really NEED to be heard by those who are there purely for the tech. I do think someone from Philly needs to answer the original question: can they put on a single track conference if that's what the community wants. It will make a difference it seems, in the vote. Then if BOTH LA and Philly can do single track (or multitrack or some other permutation) we can vote on each city as equals. This way we don't need to debate the merits of single or multitrack at the same time as we're debating the merits of LA versus Philly. Christina Salazar Systems Librarian John Spoor Broome Library California State University, Channel Islands 805/437-3198 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Joshua Gomez Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:31 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Allowing for focus via multi-track also enables echo chambers in which people that could probably most benefit from non-code related talks never see them. As a possible solution, we could have a post-conference afternoon on Thursday where people could meet to dig deeper into themes that occurred during the general session. Similar to what happened this year with the breakouts at the end, but with a little more emphasis and organization. -Josh Joshua Gomez | Sr. Software Engineer Getty Research Institute | Los Angeles, CA 310-440-7421 Frumkin, Jeremy A - (frumkinj) frumk...@email.arizona.edu 02/23/15 11:19 AM A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals. 2) Separate from either proposal, I was struck this year by a greater diversity in topic areas for code4lib than I have observed in the past. There definitely felt like there was interest in tracks that were not as code-focused (such as culture / community, management, etc.). With the conference growing to the size it has, I personally feel it might be interesting to try a hybrid of single / multi-track, to allow those attending an opportunity to have the ability to have some additional focus on some theme areas. When we started code4lib, the size of the conference was such that a single track made a lot of sense; as the event has grown, both in size and maturity, I'd like to suggest that it may be worth exploring having both single track sessions and multi-track sessions to allow deeper dives by different segments of the attendees. Just my $.02 -- jaf --- Jeremy Frumkin Assistant Dean / Chief Technology Strategist University of Arizona Libraries +1 520.626.7296 j...@arizona.edu A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. - Albert Einstein On 2/23/15, 12:09 PM, Riley Childs rchi...@cucawarriors.com wrote: I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
I have that from this side of the country. :) ALA and DrupalCon are both in CA, LITA Forum is in MN, PLA is in Denver, etc. I would never be able to afford to go to all of them, obviously, but it makes it harder to choose when they're all so far away. So I feel your pain. Boy howdy do I feel your pain. :) Sarah Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 11:59:45 -0800 From: mark.perno...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Having recently read both proposals, my only concern is that SLA is in Philadelphia in 2016. I like traveling east, but twice to Philadelphia within 6 months of each other is a bit much for me. I realize not everyone is in SLA, or coming from the west, just wanted to point it out. I do like the multi-track idea, and do appreciate an organization spreading annual conferences around the country. Perhaps 2016 just isn't my year (which is fine, too). .m On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Sarah Shealy sarah.she...@outlook.com wrote: There are definitely amazing points in both proposals. Either way it goes C4L is going to be awesome in 2016. Everyone has a different motivation on voting, and think we should keep that in mind. Two years running on the west coast might be more than some can afford. Some may have personal reasons for preferring LA (or can't afford to travel east). Other people may feel super strongly about the Philly beer selection. Or have personal ties to the locations that may be used in LA. On the subject of single vs multi-track, I'd say that I would have *loved* a break from the way-over-my-head-and-super-technical single track just for an hour or 2. But that doesn't mean it *should* be that way - I think it could vary from year to year based on proposals. There's no reason not to have a single-track year followed my a hybrid followed by a single-track year. That's one of the beauties of C4L. Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 19:18:19 + From: frumk...@email.arizona.edu Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals. 2) Separate from either proposal, I was struck this year by a greater diversity in topic areas for code4lib than I have observed in the past. There definitely felt like there was interest in tracks that were not as code-focused (such as culture / community, management, etc.). With the conference growing to the size it has, I personally feel it might be interesting to try a hybrid of single / multi-track, to allow those attending an opportunity to have the ability to have some additional focus on some theme areas. When we started code4lib, the size of the conference was such that a single track made a lot of sense; as the event has grown, both in size and maturity, I'd like to suggest that it may be worth exploring having both single track sessions and multi-track sessions to allow deeper dives by different segments of the attendees. Just my $.02 -- jaf --- Jeremy Frumkin Assistant Dean / Chief Technology Strategist University of Arizona Libraries +1 520.626.7296 j...@arizona.edu A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. - Albert Einstein On 2/23/15, 12:09 PM, Riley Childs rchi...@cucawarriors.com wrote: I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy. This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not one of the named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. Thank you for your compliance. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it nor any attachments may be reproduced, adapted, forwarded or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright ow...@cucawarriors.com From: Collier, Aaronmailto:acoll...@calstate.edu Sent
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
Allowing for focus via multi-track also enables echo chambers in which people that could probably most benefit from non-code related talks never see them. As a possible solution, we could have a post-conference afternoon on Thursday where people could meet to dig deeper into themes that occurred during the general session. Similar to what happened this year with the breakouts at the end, but with a little more emphasis and organization. -Josh Joshua Gomez | Sr. Software Engineer Getty Research Institute | Los Angeles, CA 310-440-7421 Frumkin, Jeremy A - (frumkinj) frumk...@email.arizona.edu 02/23/15 11:19 AM A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals. 2) Separate from either proposal, I was struck this year by a greater diversity in topic areas for code4lib than I have observed in the past. There definitely felt like there was interest in tracks that were not as code-focused (such as culture / community, management, etc.). With the conference growing to the size it has, I personally feel it might be interesting to try a hybrid of single / multi-track, to allow those attending an opportunity to have the ability to have some additional focus on some theme areas. When we started code4lib, the size of the conference was such that a single track made a lot of sense; as the event has grown, both in size and maturity, I'd like to suggest that it may be worth exploring having both single track sessions and multi-track sessions to allow deeper dives by different segments of the attendees. Just my $.02 -- jaf --- Jeremy Frumkin Assistant Dean / Chief Technology Strategist University of Arizona Libraries +1 520.626.7296 j...@arizona.edu A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. - Albert Einstein On 2/23/15, 12:09 PM, Riley Childs rchi...@cucawarriors.com wrote: I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy. This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not one of the named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. Thank you for your compliance. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it nor any attachments may be reproduced, adapted, forwarded or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright ow...@cucawarriors.com From: Collier, Aaronmailto:acoll...@calstate.edu Sent: ?2/?23/?2015 2:08 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDUmailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location In conjunction with the distributed location pre-conferences AND multi-track the proposal is not very appealing. -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Fox, Bobbi Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 10:51 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Is there wiggle room on the Philadelphia multiple track proposal, or do those of us who would prefer single track only have the [not]choice of voting for L.A.? Best regards, Bobbi On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A: Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q: Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
There are definitely amazing points in both proposals. Either way it goes C4L is going to be awesome in 2016. Everyone has a different motivation on voting, and think we should keep that in mind. Two years running on the west coast might be more than some can afford. Some may have personal reasons for preferring LA (or can't afford to travel east). Other people may feel super strongly about the Philly beer selection. Or have personal ties to the locations that may be used in LA. On the subject of single vs multi-track, I'd say that I would have *loved* a break from the way-over-my-head-and-super-technical single track just for an hour or 2. But that doesn't mean it *should* be that way - I think it could vary from year to year based on proposals. There's no reason not to have a single-track year followed my a hybrid followed by a single-track year. That's one of the beauties of C4L. Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 19:18:19 + From: frumk...@email.arizona.edu Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals. 2) Separate from either proposal, I was struck this year by a greater diversity in topic areas for code4lib than I have observed in the past. There definitely felt like there was interest in tracks that were not as code-focused (such as culture / community, management, etc.). With the conference growing to the size it has, I personally feel it might be interesting to try a hybrid of single / multi-track, to allow those attending an opportunity to have the ability to have some additional focus on some theme areas. When we started code4lib, the size of the conference was such that a single track made a lot of sense; as the event has grown, both in size and maturity, I'd like to suggest that it may be worth exploring having both single track sessions and multi-track sessions to allow deeper dives by different segments of the attendees. Just my $.02 -- jaf --- Jeremy Frumkin Assistant Dean / Chief Technology Strategist University of Arizona Libraries +1 520.626.7296 j...@arizona.edu A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. - Albert Einstein On 2/23/15, 12:09 PM, Riley Childs rchi...@cucawarriors.com wrote: I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy. This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not one of the named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. Thank you for your compliance. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it nor any attachments may be reproduced, adapted, forwarded or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright ow...@cucawarriors.com From: Collier, Aaronmailto:acoll...@calstate.edu Sent: ?2/?23/?2015 2:08 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDUmailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location In conjunction with the distributed location pre-conferences AND multi-track the proposal is not very appealing. -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Fox, Bobbi Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 10:51 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Is there wiggle room on the Philadelphia multiple track proposal, or do those of us who would prefer single track only have the [not]choice of voting for L.A.? Best regards, Bobbi On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
Then... we can vote on each city as equals. Seriously? There are two very nice host proposals. They each seem pretty clear about the plans of the host committees. Read them, vote, get involved in the planning with whichever group ends up in the hard (but rewarding) position of making this happen for 2016. The two proposals *are* equals and (sorry, but...) it's obnoxious to suggest otherwise. - Tom On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Salazar, Christina christina.sala...@csuci.edu wrote: What Josh said: In a multi-track, you are forced to choose and never get to see what is going on in the areas that you've been forced to opt out of. Which I think would be a shame since some of the non-technical talks really NEED to be heard by those who are there purely for the tech. I do think someone from Philly needs to answer the original question: can they put on a single track conference if that's what the community wants. It will make a difference it seems, in the vote. Then if BOTH LA and Philly can do single track (or multitrack or some other permutation) we can vote on each city as equals. This way we don't need to debate the merits of single or multitrack at the same time as we're debating the merits of LA versus Philly. Christina Salazar Systems Librarian John Spoor Broome Library California State University, Channel Islands 805/437-3198 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Joshua Gomez Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:31 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Allowing for focus via multi-track also enables echo chambers in which people that could probably most benefit from non-code related talks never see them. As a possible solution, we could have a post-conference afternoon on Thursday where people could meet to dig deeper into themes that occurred during the general session. Similar to what happened this year with the breakouts at the end, but with a little more emphasis and organization. -Josh Joshua Gomez | Sr. Software Engineer Getty Research Institute | Los Angeles, CA 310-440-7421 Frumkin, Jeremy A - (frumkinj) frumk...@email.arizona.edu 02/23/15 11:19 AM A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals. 2) Separate from either proposal, I was struck this year by a greater diversity in topic areas for code4lib than I have observed in the past. There definitely felt like there was interest in tracks that were not as code-focused (such as culture / community, management, etc.). With the conference growing to the size it has, I personally feel it might be interesting to try a hybrid of single / multi-track, to allow those attending an opportunity to have the ability to have some additional focus on some theme areas. When we started code4lib, the size of the conference was such that a single track made a lot of sense; as the event has grown, both in size and maturity, I'd like to suggest that it may be worth exploring having both single track sessions and multi-track sessions to allow deeper dives by different segments of the attendees. Just my $.02 -- jaf --- Jeremy Frumkin Assistant Dean / Chief Technology Strategist University of Arizona Libraries +1 520.626.7296 j...@arizona.edu A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. - Albert Einstein On 2/23/15, 12:09 PM, Riley Childs rchi...@cucawarriors.com wrote: I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy. This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not one of the named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. Thank you for your compliance. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it nor any attachments may be reproduced, adapted, forwarded or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright ow...@cucawarriors.com From: Collier, Aaronmailto:acoll...@calstate.edu Sent: ?2/?23
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
Hi All, Couple of notes on the proposal for multi-track. 1) It ain't set in stone. Much of whether or not it would happen really depends on logistics of the space, the extra costs involved, community feedback. Right now I'd say community feedback we have heard is pretty evenly split. As a commitee we have already been reflecting on the response to multi-track so far and know that we would really need to weigh out the possible benefits (more content from more presenters) against possible drawbacks (creating silos). I also think this is an opportunity to elicit more feedback from the community about what type of content isn't at code4lib that should/could be. 2) I don't think multi-track can only be divided into Tech and non-Tech slots. Other groupings could include may be Linked Data focused, Repository focused, Public Library focused, etc. Again, those are how we would necessarily think about tracks, *if they happen* just ideas, and we'd be plenty open to other suggestions from the community. Also about Philly weather: For our colleagues in New England, the upper Midwest and the Rocky Mountain region, Philly's weather is going to feel downright balmy. :) Best, Chad On Mon Feb 23 2015 at 2:10:05 PM Riley Childs rchi...@cucawarriors.com wrote: I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy. This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not one of the named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. Thank you for your compliance. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it nor any attachments may be reproduced, adapted, forwarded or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright ow...@cucawarriors.com From: Collier, Aaronmailto:acoll...@calstate.edu Sent: 2/23/2015 2:08 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDUmailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location In conjunction with the distributed location pre-conferences AND multi-track the proposal is not very appealing. -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Fox, Bobbi Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 10:51 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Is there wiggle room on the Philadelphia multiple track proposal, or do those of us who would prefer single track only have the [not]choice of voting for L.A.? Best regards, Bobbi On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Francis Kayiwa kay...@pobox.com wrote: Hey All, Just wanted to make everyone aware of the two fantastic proposals to host Code4lib 2016 that have been submitted. The cities of of Los Angeles and Philadelphia have submitted proposals which are now available at the official Code4lib Website http://code4lib.org/content/code4lib-2016-conference-proposals Voting will open tomorrow (UTC so probably already open if you are reading this) and will remain open until 2015-03-07 08:00:00 UTC You can vote here (registration required) http://vote.code4lib.org/election/37 Thanks to the both cities for their submissions. best regards, Francis -- FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #13 A: Doc, Happy, Bashful, Dopey, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy Q: Who were the Democratic presidential candidates?
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
Having recently read both proposals, my only concern is that SLA is in Philadelphia in 2016. I like traveling east, but twice to Philadelphia within 6 months of each other is a bit much for me. I realize not everyone is in SLA, or coming from the west, just wanted to point it out. I do like the multi-track idea, and do appreciate an organization spreading annual conferences around the country. Perhaps 2016 just isn't my year (which is fine, too). .m On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Sarah Shealy sarah.she...@outlook.com wrote: There are definitely amazing points in both proposals. Either way it goes C4L is going to be awesome in 2016. Everyone has a different motivation on voting, and think we should keep that in mind. Two years running on the west coast might be more than some can afford. Some may have personal reasons for preferring LA (or can't afford to travel east). Other people may feel super strongly about the Philly beer selection. Or have personal ties to the locations that may be used in LA. On the subject of single vs multi-track, I'd say that I would have *loved* a break from the way-over-my-head-and-super-technical single track just for an hour or 2. But that doesn't mean it *should* be that way - I think it could vary from year to year based on proposals. There's no reason not to have a single-track year followed my a hybrid followed by a single-track year. That's one of the beauties of C4L. Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 19:18:19 + From: frumk...@email.arizona.edu Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals. 2) Separate from either proposal, I was struck this year by a greater diversity in topic areas for code4lib than I have observed in the past. There definitely felt like there was interest in tracks that were not as code-focused (such as culture / community, management, etc.). With the conference growing to the size it has, I personally feel it might be interesting to try a hybrid of single / multi-track, to allow those attending an opportunity to have the ability to have some additional focus on some theme areas. When we started code4lib, the size of the conference was such that a single track made a lot of sense; as the event has grown, both in size and maturity, I'd like to suggest that it may be worth exploring having both single track sessions and multi-track sessions to allow deeper dives by different segments of the attendees. Just my $.02 -- jaf --- Jeremy Frumkin Assistant Dean / Chief Technology Strategist University of Arizona Libraries +1 520.626.7296 j...@arizona.edu A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. - Albert Einstein On 2/23/15, 12:09 PM, Riley Childs rchi...@cucawarriors.com wrote: I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy. This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not one of the named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. Thank you for your compliance. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it nor any attachments may be reproduced, adapted, forwarded or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright ow...@cucawarriors.com From: Collier, Aaronmailto:acoll...@calstate.edu Sent: ?2/?23/?2015 2:08 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDUmailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location In conjunction with the distributed location pre-conferences AND multi-track the proposal is not very appealing. -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Fox, Bobbi Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 10:51 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Is there wiggle room on the Philadelphia multiple track proposal
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
An aside but on the topic of selecting locations: I think it's worth considering where the conference has been recently when selecting the next year's location. It gives people from all over the country a chance to attend C4L and become part of our community if the annual conference jumps around. While I haven't read both proposals or decided which I'll vote for, it would be great to return East to Philly rather than have it on the West Coast again, and then the year after look towards a non-coastal spot. I say this even being in California and very much valuing cheaper and shorter flights. I know I expressed my desire for a West Coast = East Coast = Middle America rhythm to conference locations to a few people in Portland. Just reiterating here for the list's sake. Best, Eric On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Salazar, Christina christina.sala...@csuci.edu wrote: What Josh said: In a multi-track, you are forced to choose and never get to see what is going on in the areas that you've been forced to opt out of. Which I think would be a shame since some of the non-technical talks really NEED to be heard by those who are there purely for the tech. I do think someone from Philly needs to answer the original question: can they put on a single track conference if that's what the community wants. It will make a difference it seems, in the vote. Then if BOTH LA and Philly can do single track (or multitrack or some other permutation) we can vote on each city as equals. This way we don't need to debate the merits of single or multitrack at the same time as we're debating the merits of LA versus Philly. Christina Salazar Systems Librarian John Spoor Broome Library California State University, Channel Islands 805/437-3198 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Joshua Gomez Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:31 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location Allowing for focus via multi-track also enables echo chambers in which people that could probably most benefit from non-code related talks never see them. As a possible solution, we could have a post-conference afternoon on Thursday where people could meet to dig deeper into themes that occurred during the general session. Similar to what happened this year with the breakouts at the end, but with a little more emphasis and organization. -Josh Joshua Gomez | Sr. Software Engineer Getty Research Institute | Los Angeles, CA 310-440-7421 Frumkin, Jeremy A - (frumkinj) frumk...@email.arizona.edu 02/23/15 11:19 AM A couple of thoughts: 1) It takes a lot of effort to put these proposals together. Let's not lose sight that both proposals are good proposals, and that's why we have a vote. I'm sure there are various opinions on both proposals. 2) Separate from either proposal, I was struck this year by a greater diversity in topic areas for code4lib than I have observed in the past. There definitely felt like there was interest in tracks that were not as code-focused (such as culture / community, management, etc.). With the conference growing to the size it has, I personally feel it might be interesting to try a hybrid of single / multi-track, to allow those attending an opportunity to have the ability to have some additional focus on some theme areas. When we started code4lib, the size of the conference was such that a single track made a lot of sense; as the event has grown, both in size and maturity, I'd like to suggest that it may be worth exploring having both single track sessions and multi-track sessions to allow deeper dives by different segments of the attendees. Just my $.02 -- jaf --- Jeremy Frumkin Assistant Dean / Chief Technology Strategist University of Arizona Libraries +1 520.626.7296 j...@arizona.edu A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. - Albert Einstein On 2/23/15, 12:09 PM, Riley Childs rchi...@cucawarriors.com wrote: I agree, the appeal of code4lib is the single track. Sent from my Windows Phone -- Riley Childs Senior Charlotte United Christian Academy Library Services Administrator IT Services Administrator (704) 537-0331x101 (704) 497-2086 rileychilds.net @rowdychildren I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy. This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not one of the named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original
Re: [CODE4LIB] Vote for Code4lib 2016 location
My reasons for preferring LA are purely personal and #theweatheristoodamncold, and I'm optimistic that I can make it to either location this year after several years away. But the most valuable sessions for me at C4LConf for me have been the BOF/breakout sessions. This is very different from multitrack presentations. Breaking into small groups is often really valuable; breakout *presentations* rarely so. In a smaller group, people feel more comfortable asking stupid questions, which are usually the questions everyone else has. Eric
