summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/2023/organizers-notebook
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to '2023/organizers-notebook')
-rw-r--r--2023/organizers-notebook/index.org45
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
+