diff options
Diffstat (limited to '')
| -rw-r--r-- | 2023/organizers-notebook/index.org | 45 |
1 files changed, 42 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/2023/organizers-notebook/index.org b/2023/organizers-notebook/index.org index 8a9856c1..4f5c669a 100644 --- a/2023/organizers-notebook/index.org +++ b/2023/organizers-notebook/index.org @@ -23,12 +23,50 @@ Last year, these were the actual dates: - Sept 18: Original CFP deadline - Sept 30: CFP closed after extension - Oct 1: acceptances sent -* Lessons learned from previous years +* Phases :PROPERTIES: -:CUSTOM_ID: lessons-learned +:CUSTOM_ID: phases :END: +** Drafting CFP +:PROPERTIES: +:CUSTOM_ID: cfp +:END: +*** Considerations -** CFP and review +Ooh, that's true, we could see if there are parts of the CFP that we +can remove or postpone. Here are some thoughts: + +- We might not need the 10+20+40 structure in the proposal. We did + that before because people tend to propose longer talks, and we had + to do lots of e-mail coordination in order to squeeze everything + into one track. If we're doing multiple streams, there's less time + pressure, so we might not need to confuse people with those + requirements. I think it would still be good to nudge people towards + 20 minutes for their prerecorded presentations (separate time for + Q&A) instead of 40 minutes, because it's good for people's attention + spans. As an incentive to consider a 5-10 minute talk, we can say + that 5-10 minute videos can be played extra times during the + conference to fill gaps. + - Choices: + - Keep the 10+20+40 structure so that people who want to propose + longer talks are nudged to think about shorter versions + - Strongly nudge people towards 20-minute talks, with repeats as + the incentive for shorter talks and extra coordination/waiting + needed for longer talks. People propose just the talk length + they want (and can optionally propose other talk lengths if they + want to be considered for them). +- We added emergency contact info, public contact info, pronouns, and + introduction to the submission form because we ended up going back + and forth with people in previous years, and sometimes we had + incomplete info and were panicking about how to reach people during + the conference. We could drop this from the submission form and do a + separate speaker information form. + - Choices: + - Talk submission, then speaker information form: less + intimidating for speakers + - Everything in one: easier for organizers + +*** Lessons learned from previous years - Ask for public e-mail or contact information, IRC handle in CFP - Added to submit page. @@ -104,3 +142,4 @@ Last year, these were the actual dates: with his work trips - I checked with him and the people at his work don't have a schedule yet, so we should go ahead and plan + |