So I'm about 2/3 of the way through evaluating the pgCon submissions so that we can choose talks. The good thing is that we have an amazing bunch of interesting talks, including genomics, e-government, big data, security, extensions, administration, and of course 9.4 stuff. The bad thing is that a lot of speakers this year submitted one-sentence proposals, so they are getting rejected. And that's sad, since those speakers probably have awesome stuff to present, but if we don't have a description, how can we tell?
In several cases, I get the impression that because the speakers are well-known community members, they expect us to trust them that they have a good topic. The problem with that reasoning is that we're not going to bump a new speaker with an interesting topic and a well-prepared talk outline against an old hand with a proposal which reads "something cool here". This year, there's 97 proposals for 32 slots, so we're going to take the best of the best.
So ... if you submitted a one-sentence talk proposal: there's still 3 days of voting left. Update the proposal ASAP, and let us know you've done so! (email@example.com)
"we're not going to bump a new speaker with an interesting topic and a well-prepared talk outline against an old hand with a proposal which reads "something cool here"."ReplyDelete
Thank you very much...I've seen this happen on another committee I'm on* and it bothers me.
*not a Pg conference.