Add lesson

2 files changed, 26 insertions, 4 deletions

diff --git a/2022/organizers-notebook.md b/2022/organizers-notebook.md
index 5aaaed5a..f05bbd3f 100644
--- a/2022/organizers-notebook.md
+++ b/2022/organizers-notebook.md
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ Planned dates and phases:
 Current phase: No prerecs to process yet, so it’s a good time to focus on infrastructure
 
 
-## TODO Review the submissions in the pad (see emacsconf-org-private or conf.org for the link) and add any objections or comments by Sept 26 for possible [early speaker notification](#org8c7c8bd), Oct 7 for everything     :organizers:
+## TODO Review the submissions in the pad (see emacsconf-org-private or conf.org for the link) and add any objections or comments by Sept 26 for possible [early speaker notification](#orgbc97490), Oct 7 for everything     :organizers:
 
 -   zaeph: will start reviewing on Sep 21
 
@@ -361,6 +361,26 @@ Ideas:
     -   Speakers can attend related talks more easily
 
 
+## Archive
+
+
+### Where should volunteers e-mail?
+
+-   **Default to emacsconf-org and offer emacsconf-org-private as an option**
+-   emacsconf-org-private
+    -   less public, e.g. if for whatever reason we might have to decline an offer of help
+    -   Also, some people want to volunteer but do not want to be in the public’s eye.
+-   emacsconf-org
+    -   If you’re thinking about the enticement factor of having people
+        volunteer publicly, we’ll still have a well-furnished list of people
+        helping us run the conf somewhere on the wiki.  [11:22]
+    -   i would think if someone doesn’t want to do it publicly, they could
+        opt to write to -org-private instead, but otherwise the defacto
+        should be public (-org)
+    -   i just think most folks would want to do this publicly unless for
+        specific reasons, rather than the other way around
+
+
 <a id="roles"></a>
 
 # Roles needed
@@ -509,7 +529,7 @@ We tried using q56 before, but it was a little too aggressive. Q=32 is the defau
 
 ### Test stream setup
 
-[Stream](#org506c289)
+[Stream](#org5d494ae)
 
 
 ### Set up MPV for captions
@@ -826,7 +846,7 @@ Exceptions:
 
 ### Send thanks
 
-[Thank you, next steps](#orgc5ab67a)
+[Thank you, next steps](#orgecfaf5c)
 
 
 ### Extract the opening and closing remarks
@@ -977,7 +997,7 @@ Probably focus on grabbing the audio first and seeing what&rsquo;s worth keeping
 
 Make a table of the form
 
-<table id="org5965ffa" border="2" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" rules="groups" frame="hsides">
+<table id="org551b2c3" border="2" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" rules="groups" frame="hsides">
 
 
 <colgroup>
@@ -1984,4 +2004,5 @@ chatter in the other lists Cc&rsquo;d on this message.  Thank you.
 
 -   Ask for public e-mail or contact information, IRC handle in CFP
 -   Be even more stringent about the 10/20/40-min splits.  A lot of speakers still default to the 20- or 40-min formats without providing us shorter formats, and that puts strain on our schedule and requires us to use a different template for the notification (which can be confusing).  We need to stress that not respecting the format makes it harder not only for the organizers, but also for the speakers themselves (since they will have to rethink their presentation).
+-   Two people is the sweet number of reviewers to have for the proposals before sending the notifications, and there’d be diminishing returns with more.  Two is enough to release the pressure on SCHED, verify the metadata (esp. speaker availability), and suggest a different ordering where appropriate.  It can take a long time to comb through the proposals (roughly 10 proposals per hour), and whilst it’d be difficult to justify more in-depth reviewers, other orgas can do a shallow-pass to catch red-flags.
 
diff --git a/2022/organizers-notebook.org b/2022/organizers-notebook.org
index 1e45cd8e..b24fa719 100644
--- a/2022/organizers-notebook.org
+++ b/2022/organizers-notebook.org
@@ -1920,6 +1920,7 @@ Meant to be used with `after-save-hook'."
 
 - Ask for public e-mail or contact information, IRC handle in CFP
 - Be even more stringent about the 10/20/40-min splits.  A lot of speakers still default to the 20- or 40-min formats without providing us shorter formats, and that puts strain on our schedule and requires us to use a different template for the notification (which can be confusing).  We need to stress that not respecting the format makes it harder not only for the organizers, but also for the speakers themselves (since they will have to rethink their presentation).
+- Two people is the sweet number of reviewers to have for the proposals before sending the notifications, and there’d be diminishing returns with more.  Two is enough to release the pressure on SCHED, verify the metadata (esp. speaker availability), and suggest a different ordering where appropriate.  It can take a long time to comb through the proposals (roughly 10 proposals per hour), and whilst it’d be difficult to justify more in-depth reviewers, other orgas can do a shallow-pass to catch red-flags.
   
 * COMMENT Copyright & License