[CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-23 Thread Susan Kane
I think the repeating morning / afternoon concept has some merit, but
people would need to be assigned to the morning slot or the afternoon slot
on any given day to keep the room sizes reasonable.  Hard to enforce but
necessary.

Maybe there is a big get-together.  Maybe not.  Maybe the smaller
get-togethers that having so much non-presentation time will create are
more worthwhile anyway.

If you are giving one presentation, giving it twice either on the same day
or on another day that week is not what I would call overtime.  Especially
if you don't miss any other info.

You could repeat the conference at a totally different time of year ...
everyone who didn't get in is automatically registered for the second
conference later that year ... kinda wacky but ...

You could plan for a second conference of the same size in the same city
(different hotel).  After presentations for C4L1 are finalized, presenters
are sought on similar topics for C4L2.  Overflow registrations for C4L1
automatically go to C4L2.  Similar content means that institutions who paid
for you to come to learn about X will hopefully not be upset if you learn
about X from a different person across the street.  Everyone hangs out
informally during off-presentation times.

One could call that tracks but I'm trying for more of a mirror download
site concept.

Or ... you just go Big and you accept it and then you think about how to
have other conferences (maybe regional, maybe not) that are Small.

-- Susan


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-23 Thread Joe Hourcle
On Dec 23, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Susan Kane wrote:

[trimmed]

 You could repeat the conference at a totally different time of year ...
 everyone who didn't get in is automatically registered for the second
 conference later that year ... kinda wacky but ...
 
 You could plan for a second conference of the same size in the same city
 (different hotel).  After presentations for C4L1 are finalized, presenters
 are sought on similar topics for C4L2.  Overflow registrations for C4L1
 automatically go to C4L2.  Similar content means that institutions who paid
 for you to come to learn about X will hopefully not be upset if you learn
 about X from a different person across the street.  Everyone hangs out
 informally during off-presentation times.
 
 One could call that tracks but I'm trying for more of a mirror download
 site concept.

[trimmed]

For some reason, this jogged my memory --

The DC-IA (Information Architecture) group used to hold an meeting
after the IA Summit to basically recap what was discussed at the IA
Summit.  (I think they called it the 'IA Redux')

As there was more than one track, it allowed people who did go to
the summit to hear more about the other presentations they missed,
and for those who didn't go at all, it gave them a chance to at least
hear second-hand what was discussed.

Obviously, it wasn't nearly as complete as the original, and lost some
in translation, but I found it to be informative.

Particularly when you consider the proposal to limit the number of
attendees from one organization, this means that you spread the
number of attendees out, who can then spread the gospel to the others
that weren't able to attend.

Now, I'm not saying that people have to go out and take copious notes
and then try to get them into some format for dissemination (I did that
for the last RDAP meeting ... it's a lot of work trying to get 'em into a
format that others might understand), but if you get a few people
together who were at the meeting, and they can talk about what they
thought was interesting (possibly referring to notes they might've
jotted down), and that often spurs interesting discussions in itself.

-Joe

ps.  as an example of understandability, compare:
http://vso1.nascom.nasa.gov/joe/notes/rdap/RDAP_2011_notes.txt
http://vso1.nascom.nasa.gov/joe/notes/rdap/RDAP_2011_report.html
(and I took the original notes by hand, not typed, so I was spending
my nights at the meeting typing, then making 'em understandable for
the next week or so)


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-23 Thread Roy Tennant
I feel like this discussion is missing the boat. Let's be clear: there
are some aspects of small conferences that simply cannot be achieved
by large conferences -- you get to where you are swapping one bad
situation for another. Having said that, I think those of us who pine
for the small conference experience of Code4Lib need to get over it.

Nothing could be simpler than single-tracking. Getting 500 people into
a room designed to hold that many is relatively trivial, and yet we
are cooking up incredible schemes to attempt to cut that number to 250
people in a room for no reason that I can fathom.

Having been one of those aforementioned people whining about the small
conference experience, I hereby withdraw any objections I may have
had. Let's celebrate the success of this community in its ability to
welcome an ever-widening circle of technical librarians of all stripes
and keep on truckin'.

Let's see some proposals for next year that offer the ability to host
a much larger conference than this year's and see what we can do with
it. If it's a disaster then we can try something else.
Roy

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Joe Hourcle
onei...@grace.nascom.nasa.gov wrote:
 On Dec 23, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Susan Kane wrote:

 [trimmed]

 You could repeat the conference at a totally different time of year ...
 everyone who didn't get in is automatically registered for the second
 conference later that year ... kinda wacky but ...

 You could plan for a second conference of the same size in the same city
 (different hotel).  After presentations for C4L1 are finalized, presenters
 are sought on similar topics for C4L2.  Overflow registrations for C4L1
 automatically go to C4L2.  Similar content means that institutions who paid
 for you to come to learn about X will hopefully not be upset if you learn
 about X from a different person across the street.  Everyone hangs out
 informally during off-presentation times.

 One could call that tracks but I'm trying for more of a mirror download
 site concept.

 [trimmed]

 For some reason, this jogged my memory --

 The DC-IA (Information Architecture) group used to hold an meeting
 after the IA Summit to basically recap what was discussed at the IA
 Summit.  (I think they called it the 'IA Redux')

 As there was more than one track, it allowed people who did go to
 the summit to hear more about the other presentations they missed,
 and for those who didn't go at all, it gave them a chance to at least
 hear second-hand what was discussed.

 Obviously, it wasn't nearly as complete as the original, and lost some
 in translation, but I found it to be informative.

 Particularly when you consider the proposal to limit the number of
 attendees from one organization, this means that you spread the
 number of attendees out, who can then spread the gospel to the others
 that weren't able to attend.

 Now, I'm not saying that people have to go out and take copious notes
 and then try to get them into some format for dissemination (I did that
 for the last RDAP meeting ... it's a lot of work trying to get 'em into a
 format that others might understand), but if you get a few people
 together who were at the meeting, and they can talk about what they
 thought was interesting (possibly referring to notes they might've
 jotted down), and that often spurs interesting discussions in itself.

 -Joe

 ps.  as an example of understandability, compare:
        http://vso1.nascom.nasa.gov/joe/notes/rdap/RDAP_2011_notes.txt
        http://vso1.nascom.nasa.gov/joe/notes/rdap/RDAP_2011_report.html
 (and I took the original notes by hand, not typed, so I was spending
 my nights at the meeting typing, then making 'em understandable for
 the next week or so)


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-23 Thread Kevin S. Clarke
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Roy Tennant roytenn...@gmail.com wrote:

 Having been one of those aforementioned people whining about the small
 conference experience, I hereby withdraw any objections I may have
 had. Let's celebrate the success of this community in its ability to
 welcome an ever-widening circle of technical librarians of all stripes
 and keep on truckin'.

 Let's see some proposals for next year that offer the ability to host
 a much larger conference than this year's and see what we can do with
 it.

I don't think there is a need for people who want the smaller
conference to withdraw their objections (unless they want to, of
course).  What it all boils down to, in my opinion, is the last
paragraph above.

Propose a conference of the style and size that you want and the
community will vote on it!

If the majority of the folks want a large conference with a different
style, that's what we'll have.  It may be that the people pining for
smaller conferences will then put more focus on the regional ones.

What it all depends on, in my opinion, is someone willing to step up
and say, I'm willing to do the work to make X happen.  X might be a
small regional code4libcamp or it might be a large annual conference
(or it might be a small annual conference with better streaming, etc.)

The community has always had these long sprawling email conversations,
but what it really boils down to, in my opinion, is people from the
community willing to step up and put in the work to make something
happen.  Scratch your itches, folks!

Fwiw,
Kevin


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-23 Thread Nate Vack
As a guide to how many seats we may need to open up, it could be worth
looking at the size of this mailing list compared to the number of
registrations (waitlist included) for the conference.

Is there a relatively easy way to get that data? Historical list size
seems like it might be tricky...

-n


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-23 Thread Paul Cummins

On 12/23/2011 1:17 PM, Nate Vack wrote:

As a guide to how many seats we may need to open up, it could be worth
looking at the size of this mailing list compared to the number of
registrations (waitlist included) for the conference.

Is there a relatively easy way to get that data? Historical list size
seems like it might be tricky...

-n



 puzzles are fun. Sorry if this doesn't make any sense but I have to 
jump in here.
   Maybe think about institutions/organizations instead of people, give 
each institution a weight depending on how many they might send. For 
instance, an institution has 10 Code4Lib followers but the reality is 
that they will never send more than one person. So they get a weight of 
one, versus an institution that sends 10 people and their weight could 
be affected by the limit someone talked about. But, if an institution 
volunteered to host, their weight could be increased for 2 years.
   Now have C4L poll the list of slots( institutions) and if they don't 
have their person ready to go, close the slot and go to the next.

 Put the availability responsibility on the institution.

ok, back to last minute shopping, I think I had too much coffee.

PaulC


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-23 Thread Kevin S. Clarke
Ah, wasn't sure if that's what you were doing or not...

Yeah, Eric would have to supply those numbers (if they're even available?)

Kevin


On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Nate Vack njv...@wisc.edu wrote:
 Right... but I don't have those messages going back to the first c4l.

 This year, it sounds like about 1/4 as many people registered for the
 conference as are on the list. Does that relationship hold for past
 years?

 -n

 On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Kevin S. Clarke kscla...@gmail.com wrote:
 Another source... when you post to the list, you get an
 acknowledgement back that includes:

 [Your message] has been successfully distributed to the CODE4LIB list
 (1904 recipients)

 Eric, love the map...

 Kevin



 On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Eric Lease Morgan emor...@nd.edu wrote:
 The mailing list includes approximately 1800 people:

 http://infomotions.com/blog/2011/03/where-in-the-world-is-the-mail-going/

  --
 ELM


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Peter Murray
That is a crazy idea.  I don't know about putting the speakers on the hook for 
two days -- particularly keynote speakers.  Still, it would be interesting for 
a site to flesh this out and propose something along these lines.


Peter  

On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Fleming, Declan wrote:
 Hi - so I know this is nuts.
 
 If we start with a couple premises for the code4lib conference:
 
 1.  Single thread is crucial.
 2.  250 is about the top limit of a single threaded conference.
 3.  400+ people want to attend.
 4.  The conference takes 2.5 days.
 
 What if we ran the 2.5 day conference twice in one week?  
 
 1.  Session 1 runs from Monday until noon on Weds.
 2.  Session 2 runs from 1p on Weds until the end of Friday.
 3.  Every one of the 23 accepted talks is given twice, once in each Session, 
 in the same order.
 4.  Each Session is attended by a different set of attendees.
 
 We could serve 500 attendees this way.
 
 If everyone came for the week, there could be parallel seminars, hack fests, 
 BootCamps, THATcamps, CURATEcamps, c4lcamps, etc... for the half of the 500 
 that wasn't in the main conference.  People could also just decide to come 
 for the 2.5 day main conference, I guess.
 
 I SAID it was crazy.  ;)
 
 D



-- 
Peter Murray
Assistant Director, Technology Services Development
LYRASIS
peter.mur...@lyrasis.org
+1 678-235-2955
 
1438 West Peachtree Street NW
Suite 200
Atlanta, GA 30309
Toll Free: 800.999.8558
Fax: 404.892.7879 
www.lyrasis.org
 
LYRASIS: Great Libraries. Strong Communities. Innovative Answers.


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Jon Stroop
Maybe keynotes happen on the middle day; the one time where the whole 
group comes together, though it would require a 2x size space... This 
could also reduce the length to 4.5 days.


On 12/22/2011 10:05 AM, Peter Murray wrote:

That is a crazy idea.  I don't know about putting the speakers on the hook for 
two days -- particularly keynote speakers.  Still, it would be interesting for 
a site to flesh this out and propose something along these lines.


Peter

On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Fleming, Declan wrote:

Hi - so I know this is nuts.

If we start with a couple premises for the code4lib conference:

1.  Single thread is crucial.
2.  250 is about the top limit of a single threaded conference.
3.  400+ people want to attend.
4.  The conference takes 2.5 days.

What if we ran the 2.5 day conference twice in one week?

1.  Session 1 runs from Monday until noon on Weds.
2.  Session 2 runs from 1p on Weds until the end of Friday.
3.  Every one of the 23 accepted talks is given twice, once in each Session, in 
the same order.
4.  Each Session is attended by a different set of attendees.

We could serve 500 attendees this way.

If everyone came for the week, there could be parallel seminars, hack fests, 
BootCamps, THATcamps, CURATEcamps, c4lcamps, etc... for the half of the 500 
that wasn't in the main conference.  People could also just decide to come for 
the 2.5 day main conference, I guess.

I SAID it was crazy.  ;)

D





Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Ross Singer
Given the fact that they have to be there twice as long (i.e. twice as
expensive), what would be the incentive to present?

This, personally, sounds like Presenter Gulag to me.

-Ross.

On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Peter Murray peter.mur...@lyrasis.org wrote:
 That is a crazy idea.  I don't know about putting the speakers on the hook 
 for two days -- particularly keynote speakers.  Still, it would be 
 interesting for a site to flesh this out and propose something along these 
 lines.


 Peter

 On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Fleming, Declan wrote:
 Hi - so I know this is nuts.

 If we start with a couple premises for the code4lib conference:

 1.  Single thread is crucial.
 2.  250 is about the top limit of a single threaded conference.
 3.  400+ people want to attend.
 4.  The conference takes 2.5 days.

 What if we ran the 2.5 day conference twice in one week?

 1.  Session 1 runs from Monday until noon on Weds.
 2.  Session 2 runs from 1p on Weds until the end of Friday.
 3.  Every one of the 23 accepted talks is given twice, once in each Session, 
 in the same order.
 4.  Each Session is attended by a different set of attendees.

 We could serve 500 attendees this way.

 If everyone came for the week, there could be parallel seminars, hack fests, 
 BootCamps, THATcamps, CURATEcamps, c4lcamps, etc... for the half of the 500 
 that wasn't in the main conference.  People could also just decide to come 
 for the 2.5 day main conference, I guess.

 I SAID it was crazy.  ;)

 D



 --
 Peter Murray
 Assistant Director, Technology Services Development
 LYRASIS
 peter.mur...@lyrasis.org
 +1 678-235-2955

 1438 West Peachtree Street NW
 Suite 200
 Atlanta, GA 30309
 Toll Free: 800.999.8558
 Fax: 404.892.7879
 www.lyrasis.org

 LYRASIS: Great Libraries. Strong Communities. Innovative Answers.


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Edward M. Corrado
I agree it is a crazy idea and I'm not sure if it would work, but I
like the out of the box thinking.

If the site had one big space that could handle 500 people, you could
just have one keynote session that both groups attended., I guess.
That does restricts the options for locations, but not as much as
needing a room for 500 people the whole time.

Speaker wise, you'd probably only have to be there one extra day. I
guess that might mean, however, that a speaker (w|c)ould participate
in half of conference A and half of conference B if that is how they
approached it.

Edward

On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Peter Murray peter.mur...@lyrasis.org wrote:
 That is a crazy idea.  I don't know about putting the speakers on the hook 
 for two days -- particularly keynote speakers.  Still, it would be 
 interesting for a site to flesh this out and propose something along these 
 lines.


 Peter

 On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Fleming, Declan wrote:
 Hi - so I know this is nuts.

 If we start with a couple premises for the code4lib conference:

 1.  Single thread is crucial.
 2.  250 is about the top limit of a single threaded conference.
 3.  400+ people want to attend.
 4.  The conference takes 2.5 days.

 What if we ran the 2.5 day conference twice in one week?

 1.  Session 1 runs from Monday until noon on Weds.
 2.  Session 2 runs from 1p on Weds until the end of Friday.
 3.  Every one of the 23 accepted talks is given twice, once in each Session, 
 in the same order.
 4.  Each Session is attended by a different set of attendees.

 We could serve 500 attendees this way.

 If everyone came for the week, there could be parallel seminars, hack fests, 
 BootCamps, THATcamps, CURATEcamps, c4lcamps, etc... for the half of the 500 
 that wasn't in the main conference.  People could also just decide to come 
 for the 2.5 day main conference, I guess.

 I SAID it was crazy.  ;)

 D



 --
 Peter Murray
 Assistant Director, Technology Services Development
 LYRASIS
 peter.mur...@lyrasis.org
 +1 678-235-2955

 1438 West Peachtree Street NW
 Suite 200
 Atlanta, GA 30309
 Toll Free: 800.999.8558
 Fax: 404.892.7879
 www.lyrasis.org

 LYRASIS: Great Libraries. Strong Communities. Innovative Answers.


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Michael J. Giarlo
At least Declan acknowledged the idea was nuts from the outset.

Yes, it's nuts.  Until I see a hosting proposal putting one of these
ideas forward, well, I was gonna say something snarky about endless
discussion but this is kind of a discussion list and I just added to
it. :)

Mmmm, this foot tastes delicious.

-Mike


On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:12, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote:
 Given the fact that they have to be there twice as long (i.e. twice as
 expensive), what would be the incentive to present?

 This, personally, sounds like Presenter Gulag to me.

 -Ross.

 On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Peter Murray peter.mur...@lyrasis.org 
 wrote:
 That is a crazy idea.  I don't know about putting the speakers on the hook 
 for two days -- particularly keynote speakers.  Still, it would be 
 interesting for a site to flesh this out and propose something along these 
 lines.


 Peter

 On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Fleming, Declan wrote:
 Hi - so I know this is nuts.

 If we start with a couple premises for the code4lib conference:

 1.  Single thread is crucial.
 2.  250 is about the top limit of a single threaded conference.
 3.  400+ people want to attend.
 4.  The conference takes 2.5 days.

 What if we ran the 2.5 day conference twice in one week?

 1.  Session 1 runs from Monday until noon on Weds.
 2.  Session 2 runs from 1p on Weds until the end of Friday.
 3.  Every one of the 23 accepted talks is given twice, once in each 
 Session, in the same order.
 4.  Each Session is attended by a different set of attendees.

 We could serve 500 attendees this way.

 If everyone came for the week, there could be parallel seminars, hack 
 fests, BootCamps, THATcamps, CURATEcamps, c4lcamps, etc... for the half of 
 the 500 that wasn't in the main conference.  People could also just decide 
 to come for the 2.5 day main conference, I guess.

 I SAID it was crazy.  ;)

 D



 --
 Peter Murray
 Assistant Director, Technology Services Development
 LYRASIS
 peter.mur...@lyrasis.org
 +1 678-235-2955

 1438 West Peachtree Street NW
 Suite 200
 Atlanta, GA 30309
 Toll Free: 800.999.8558
 Fax: 404.892.7879
 www.lyrasis.org

 LYRASIS: Great Libraries. Strong Communities. Innovative Answers.


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Jay Luker
I agree with Ed: I like that someone is throwing out crazy ideas. I
don't particularly like this crazy idea though.

If you accept that the downside to multiple tracks is fracturing of
the audience/community, then I don't see how holding a 2nd clone of
the conference on subsequent days gets around that. It might even be
worse because in a  parallel multi-track setups you would at least
have the benefit of bumping into and networking with the entire,
larger group in the off-hours. Of course, inherent in this argument is
the idea that it's not the actual talks that provide the most value in
attending the conference.

Also I agree about the Speaker Gulag issue.

--jay

On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Edward M. Corrado
ecorr...@ecorrado.us wrote:
 I agree it is a crazy idea and I'm not sure if it would work, but I
 like the out of the box thinking.

 If the site had one big space that could handle 500 people, you could
 just have one keynote session that both groups attended., I guess.
 That does restricts the options for locations, but not as much as
 needing a room for 500 people the whole time.

 Speaker wise, you'd probably only have to be there one extra day. I
 guess that might mean, however, that a speaker (w|c)ould participate
 in half of conference A and half of conference B if that is how they
 approached it.

 Edward

 On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Peter Murray peter.mur...@lyrasis.org 
 wrote:
 That is a crazy idea.  I don't know about putting the speakers on the hook 
 for two days -- particularly keynote speakers.  Still, it would be 
 interesting for a site to flesh this out and propose something along these 
 lines.


 Peter

 On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Fleming, Declan wrote:
 Hi - so I know this is nuts.

 If we start with a couple premises for the code4lib conference:

 1.  Single thread is crucial.
 2.  250 is about the top limit of a single threaded conference.
 3.  400+ people want to attend.
 4.  The conference takes 2.5 days.

 What if we ran the 2.5 day conference twice in one week?

 1.  Session 1 runs from Monday until noon on Weds.
 2.  Session 2 runs from 1p on Weds until the end of Friday.
 3.  Every one of the 23 accepted talks is given twice, once in each 
 Session, in the same order.
 4.  Each Session is attended by a different set of attendees.

 We could serve 500 attendees this way.

 If everyone came for the week, there could be parallel seminars, hack 
 fests, BootCamps, THATcamps, CURATEcamps, c4lcamps, etc... for the half of 
 the 500 that wasn't in the main conference.  People could also just decide 
 to come for the 2.5 day main conference, I guess.

 I SAID it was crazy.  ;)

 D



 --
 Peter Murray
 Assistant Director, Technology Services Development
 LYRASIS
 peter.mur...@lyrasis.org
 +1 678-235-2955

 1438 West Peachtree Street NW
 Suite 200
 Atlanta, GA 30309
 Toll Free: 800.999.8558
 Fax: 404.892.7879
 www.lyrasis.org

 LYRASIS: Great Libraries. Strong Communities. Innovative Answers.


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Wilfred Drew
Here is another crazy idea; stream the event live for those who can't get 
registered for the pace to face version and provide a lower registration fee 
for them.  


-
Wilfred (Bill) Drew, M.S., B.S., A.S.
Assistant Professor
Librarian, Systems and Tech Services/Electronic Resources/Serials
Tompkins Cortland Community College  (TC3) Library:
http://www.tc3.edu/library/ 
Dryden, N.Y. 13053-0139
Follow the library: http://twitter.com/TC3Library
E-mail: dr...@tc3.edu
Phone: 607-844-8222 ext.4406
SKYPE/Twitter:BillDrew4
SMS/TXT Me: 6072182217
Website: http://BillTheLibrarian.com 
StrengthsQuest Strengths: Ideation, Input, Learner, Command, Analytical
http://www.facebook.com/billdrew
One thing about eBooks that most people haven't thought much is that eBooks 
are the very first thing that we're all able to have as much as we want other 
than air. -- Michael Hart, Project Gutenberg
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail or document.


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Cary Gordon
This is definitely doable, and potentially effective for a single
track conference.

I have been doing streaming as a volunteer for eight years and it
keeps getting easier.

Cary

On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Wilfred Drew dr...@tc3.edu wrote:
 Here is another crazy idea; stream the event live for those who can't get 
 registered for the pace to face version and provide a lower registration fee 
 for them.


 -
 Wilfred (Bill) Drew, M.S., B.S., A.S.
 Assistant Professor
 Librarian, Systems and Tech Services/Electronic Resources/Serials
 Tompkins Cortland Community College  (TC3) Library:
 http://www.tc3.edu/library/
 Dryden, N.Y. 13053-0139
 Follow the library: http://twitter.com/TC3Library
 E-mail: dr...@tc3.edu
 Phone: 607-844-8222 ext.4406
 SKYPE/Twitter:BillDrew4
 SMS/TXT Me: 6072182217
 Website: http://BillTheLibrarian.com
 StrengthsQuest Strengths: Ideation, Input, Learner, Command, Analytical
 http://www.facebook.com/billdrew
 One thing about eBooks that most people haven't thought much is that eBooks 
 are the very first thing that we're all able to have as much as we want other 
 than air. -- Michael Hart, Project Gutenberg
 Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail or document.



-- 
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Ross Singer
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Fleming, Declan dflem...@ucsd.edu wrote:
 Hi - my hope is that people would commit to the whole week and use the time 
 during the Session they are not in to do other interesting things - camps 
 that could maybe fit in the talks that didn't get voted in, in depth seminars 
 on stuff, etc.  This way everyone is still in town for the social stuff and 
 everyone gets to see a full program.  And to buy me beer.

 I see the single track advantage in that I'm not missing something by 
 choosing one session over another.  I don't really care as much about who is 
 in the track with me, I guess.  QA might have a different flavor, but with 
 the 20 minute time slots, there's hardly time for QA anyway.  And anything 
 deep will show up on the channel.

But lightning talks and breakouts are going to be completely different.

-Ross.

 D

 -Original Message-
 From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Jay 
 Luker
 Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 7:29 AM
 To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
 Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration 
 limitations

 I agree with Ed: I like that someone is throwing out crazy ideas. I don't 
 particularly like this crazy idea though.

 If you accept that the downside to multiple tracks is fracturing of the 
 audience/community, then I don't see how holding a 2nd clone of the 
 conference on subsequent days gets around that. It might even be worse 
 because in a  parallel multi-track setups you would at least have the benefit 
 of bumping into and networking with the entire, larger group in the 
 off-hours. Of course, inherent in this argument is the idea that it's not the 
 actual talks that provide the most value in attending the conference.

 Also I agree about the Speaker Gulag issue.

 --jay

 On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Edward M. Corrado ecorr...@ecorrado.us 
 wrote:
 I agree it is a crazy idea and I'm not sure if it would work, but I
 like the out of the box thinking.

 If the site had one big space that could handle 500 people, you could
 just have one keynote session that both groups attended., I guess.
 That does restricts the options for locations, but not as much as
 needing a room for 500 people the whole time.

 Speaker wise, you'd probably only have to be there one extra day. I
 guess that might mean, however, that a speaker (w|c)ould participate
 in half of conference A and half of conference B if that is how they
 approached it.

 Edward

 On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Peter Murray peter.mur...@lyrasis.org 
 wrote:
 That is a crazy idea.  I don't know about putting the speakers on the hook 
 for two days -- particularly keynote speakers.  Still, it would be 
 interesting for a site to flesh this out and propose something along these 
 lines.


 Peter

 On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Fleming, Declan wrote:
 Hi - so I know this is nuts.

 If we start with a couple premises for the code4lib conference:

 1.  Single thread is crucial.
 2.  250 is about the top limit of a single threaded conference.
 3.  400+ people want to attend.
 4.  The conference takes 2.5 days.

 What if we ran the 2.5 day conference twice in one week?

 1.  Session 1 runs from Monday until noon on Weds.
 2.  Session 2 runs from 1p on Weds until the end of Friday.
 3.  Every one of the 23 accepted talks is given twice, once in each 
 Session, in the same order.
 4.  Each Session is attended by a different set of attendees.

 We could serve 500 attendees this way.

 If everyone came for the week, there could be parallel seminars, hack 
 fests, BootCamps, THATcamps, CURATEcamps, c4lcamps, etc... for the half of 
 the 500 that wasn't in the main conference.  People could also just decide 
 to come for the 2.5 day main conference, I guess.

 I SAID it was crazy.  ;)

 D



 --
 Peter Murray
 Assistant Director, Technology Services Development LYRASIS
 peter.mur...@lyrasis.org
 +1 678-235-2955

 1438 West Peachtree Street NW
 Suite 200
 Atlanta, GA 30309
 Toll Free: 800.999.8558
 Fax: 404.892.7879
 www.lyrasis.org

 LYRASIS: Great Libraries. Strong Communities. Innovative Answers.


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Fleming, Declan
Hi - yep, you're right about that.

D

-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Ross 
Singer
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 7:54 AM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration 
limitations

On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Fleming, Declan dflem...@ucsd.edu wrote:
 Hi - my hope is that people would commit to the whole week and use the time 
 during the Session they are not in to do other interesting things - camps 
 that could maybe fit in the talks that didn't get voted in, in depth seminars 
 on stuff, etc.  This way everyone is still in town for the social stuff and 
 everyone gets to see a full program.  And to buy me beer.

 I see the single track advantage in that I'm not missing something by 
 choosing one session over another.  I don't really care as much about who is 
 in the track with me, I guess.  QA might have a different flavor, but with 
 the 20 minute time slots, there's hardly time for QA anyway.  And anything 
 deep will show up on the channel.

But lightning talks and breakouts are going to be completely different.

-Ross.

 D

 -Original Message-
 From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf 
 Of Jay Luker
 Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 7:29 AM
 To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
 Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration 
 limitations

 I agree with Ed: I like that someone is throwing out crazy ideas. I don't 
 particularly like this crazy idea though.

 If you accept that the downside to multiple tracks is fracturing of the 
 audience/community, then I don't see how holding a 2nd clone of the 
 conference on subsequent days gets around that. It might even be worse 
 because in a  parallel multi-track setups you would at least have the benefit 
 of bumping into and networking with the entire, larger group in the 
 off-hours. Of course, inherent in this argument is the idea that it's not the 
 actual talks that provide the most value in attending the conference.

 Also I agree about the Speaker Gulag issue.

 --jay

 On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Edward M. Corrado ecorr...@ecorrado.us 
 wrote:
 I agree it is a crazy idea and I'm not sure if it would work, but I 
 like the out of the box thinking.

 If the site had one big space that could handle 500 people, you could 
 just have one keynote session that both groups attended., I guess.
 That does restricts the options for locations, but not as much as 
 needing a room for 500 people the whole time.

 Speaker wise, you'd probably only have to be there one extra day. I 
 guess that might mean, however, that a speaker (w|c)ould participate 
 in half of conference A and half of conference B if that is how they 
 approached it.

 Edward

 On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Peter Murray peter.mur...@lyrasis.org 
 wrote:
 That is a crazy idea.  I don't know about putting the speakers on the hook 
 for two days -- particularly keynote speakers.  Still, it would be 
 interesting for a site to flesh this out and propose something along these 
 lines.


 Peter

 On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Fleming, Declan wrote:
 Hi - so I know this is nuts.

 If we start with a couple premises for the code4lib conference:

 1.  Single thread is crucial.
 2.  250 is about the top limit of a single threaded conference.
 3.  400+ people want to attend.
 4.  The conference takes 2.5 days.

 What if we ran the 2.5 day conference twice in one week?

 1.  Session 1 runs from Monday until noon on Weds.
 2.  Session 2 runs from 1p on Weds until the end of Friday.
 3.  Every one of the 23 accepted talks is given twice, once in each 
 Session, in the same order.
 4.  Each Session is attended by a different set of attendees.

 We could serve 500 attendees this way.

 If everyone came for the week, there could be parallel seminars, hack 
 fests, BootCamps, THATcamps, CURATEcamps, c4lcamps, etc... for the half of 
 the 500 that wasn't in the main conference.  People could also just decide 
 to come for the 2.5 day main conference, I guess.

 I SAID it was crazy.  ;)

 D



 --
 Peter Murray
 Assistant Director, Technology Services Development LYRASIS 
 peter.mur...@lyrasis.org
 +1 678-235-2955

 1438 West Peachtree Street NW
 Suite 200
 Atlanta, GA 30309
 Toll Free: 800.999.8558
 Fax: 404.892.7879
 www.lyrasis.org

 LYRASIS: Great Libraries. Strong Communities. Innovative Answers.


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Corey A Harper
Cary,

Good to know about your extensive experience w/ streaming.

If you'll be in Seattle, would you be willing to add your name to the
Video Committee listing?
http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_committees_sign-up_page#Video_Committee

Having people who actually know what they're doing involved in this
effort *this* year will help ensure that we're actually able to pull
it off as effectively as IU did...

Thanks,
-Corey


On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Cary Gordon listu...@chillco.com wrote:
 This is definitely doable, and potentially effective for a single
 track conference.

 I have been doing streaming as a volunteer for eight years and it
 keeps getting easier.

 Cary

 On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Wilfred Drew dr...@tc3.edu wrote:
 Here is another crazy idea; stream the event live for those who can't get 
 registered for the pace to face version and provide a lower registration fee 
 for them.


 -
 Wilfred (Bill) Drew, M.S., B.S., A.S.
 Assistant Professor
 Librarian, Systems and Tech Services/Electronic Resources/Serials
 Tompkins Cortland Community College  (TC3) Library:
 http://www.tc3.edu/library/
 Dryden, N.Y. 13053-0139
 Follow the library: http://twitter.com/TC3Library
 E-mail: dr...@tc3.edu
 Phone: 607-844-8222 ext.4406
 SKYPE/Twitter:BillDrew4
 SMS/TXT Me: 6072182217
 Website: http://BillTheLibrarian.com
 StrengthsQuest Strengths: Ideation, Input, Learner, Command, Analytical
 http://www.facebook.com/billdrew
 One thing about eBooks that most people haven't thought much is that eBooks 
 are the very first thing that we're all able to have as much as we want 
 other than air. -- Michael Hart, Project Gutenberg
 Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail or document.



 --
 Cary Gordon
 The Cherry Hill Company
 http://chillco.com



-- 
Corey A Harper
Metadata Services Librarian
New York University Libraries
20 Cooper Square, 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10003-7112
212.998.2479
corey.har...@nyu.edu


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Peter Noerr
Crazy variation number 3. Have two tracks which are identical, but time shifted 
by half a day (or some other convenient unit). The presenters talk twice on the 
same day - in the morning for track A and the afternoon for track B. That way 
there is no speaker gulag, no time over-run (though, following Declan's 
point, how much time is left out of the week after travelling, so why not the 
whole week), and you get a chance to hear a really interesting presentation 
twice - or miss it twice! Yes the interactions would be different (I would hope 
so), but that may be an advantage. Questions can be asked that got the time 
chop previously, more details can be added the second time round, attendees 
have more to compare over lunch/beer. The problem would be a heard following 
one presentation so we have 500 in one and only 3 in the other. Room size 
limits (enforced) could help relieve that, or labeling people to their track 
and only allowing/encouraging mixing at intermediate events.

And streaming to a satellite meeting, say here in the Bay, area where 
10-15-20 people could get together informally gives them a chance to interact 
amongst themselves, if not the whole group. (OK, that is crazy idea #4

Peter

 -Original Message-
 From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Corey 
 A Harper
 Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 8:44 AM
 To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
 Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration 
 limitations
 
 Cary,
 
 Good to know about your extensive experience w/ streaming.
 
 If you'll be in Seattle, would you be willing to add your name to the Video 
 Committee listing?
 http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_committees_sign-up_page#Video_Committee
 
 Having people who actually know what they're doing involved in this effort 
 *this* year will help
 ensure that we're actually able to pull it off as effectively as IU did...
 
 Thanks,
 -Corey
 
 
 On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Cary Gordon listu...@chillco.com wrote:
  This is definitely doable, and potentially effective for a single
  track conference.
 
  I have been doing streaming as a volunteer for eight years and it
  keeps getting easier.
 
  Cary
 
  On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Wilfred Drew dr...@tc3.edu wrote:
  Here is another crazy idea; stream the event live for those who can't get 
  registered for the pace
 to face version and provide a lower registration fee for them.
 
 
  -
  Wilfred (Bill) Drew, M.S., B.S., A.S.
  Assistant Professor
  Librarian, Systems and Tech Services/Electronic Resources/Serials
  Tompkins Cortland Community College  (TC3) Library:
  http://www.tc3.edu/library/
  Dryden, N.Y. 13053-0139
  Follow the library: http://twitter.com/TC3Library
  E-mail: dr...@tc3.edu
  Phone: 607-844-8222 ext.4406
  SKYPE/Twitter:BillDrew4
  SMS/TXT Me: 6072182217
  Website: http://BillTheLibrarian.com
  StrengthsQuest Strengths: Ideation, Input, Learner, Command,
  Analytical http://www.facebook.com/billdrew One thing about eBooks
  that most people haven't thought much is that eBooks are the very
  first thing that we're all able to have as much as we want other than 
  air. -- Michael Hart,
 Project Gutenberg PPlease consider the environment before printing this 
 e-mail or document.
 
 
 
  --
  Cary Gordon
  The Cherry Hill Company
  http://chillco.com
 
 
 
 --
 Corey A Harper
 Metadata Services Librarian
 New York University Libraries
 20 Cooper Square, 3rd Floor
 New York, NY 10003-7112
 212.998.2479
 corey.har...@nyu.edu


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Karen Schneider

 And streaming to a satellite meeting, say here in the Bay, area where
 10-15-20 people could get together informally gives them a chance to
 interact amongst themselves, if not the whole group. (OK, that is crazy
 idea #4

 Peter


+1. The IRC channel would be a further real-time bond with the Mother Ship.

Karen G. Schneider
Holy Names University


Re: [CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations

2011-12-22 Thread Walter Lewis
On 2011-12-22, at 1:55 PM, Peter Noerr wrote:

 Crazy variation number 3. Have two tracks which are identical, but time 
 shifted by half a day (or some other convenient unit). The presenters talk 
 twice on the same day - in the morning for track A and the afternoon for 
 track B. That way there is no speaker gulag, no time over-run (though, 
 following Declan's point, how much time is left out of the week after 
 travelling, so why not the whole week), and you get a chance to hear a really 
 interesting presentation twice - or miss it twice! 

One of the things I've always enjoyed about single track conferences like 
Code4Lib and Access is that when you are speaking you don't miss all the other 
great (and more often than not, greater) presentations happening in other rooms 
while you're talking about stuff you already know.  It might be different for 
some folks, but for some of us giving a presentation is *mostly* an excuse to 
get our employers to release us from other duties and fund travel and the 
opportunity to learn.  

Walter