[CODE4LIB] My crazed idea about dealing with registration limitations
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
