Open Stack

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Niki Acosta (nikacost) <nikacost at cisco.com>
wrote:

> We decided as a group to move those to the How to Contribute track with
> the following rationale:
>

Thanks for sharing the reasoning behind your choice.


> While we liked The Critic as Contributor as a talk, there were few votes

on this talk and the score ranked lower compared to others.

 [...]

> We did our best to balance vote scoring with what we felt would
> have broad community appeal.
>
[...]

The fact that you used votes as a deciding factor, even if only as the last
one, saddens me. I see votes as results of a popularity contest and if used
for anything, they dramatically damage the minorities that are not on
twitter, the people who are shy by nature and those working for companies
that don't have a strong social media presence (or don't use it at all). In
fact, I'd argue that the results of the votes should be even hidden in the
track chair UI.

I always considered the voting process as a marketing tool for the event, a
community ritual, a celebration of openstack community as a whole and not
something that the selection committee should use. I find looking at votes
extremely unfair to the submitters and diminishing of the selection
committee's role, too. IMO a good committee should evaluate based on
quality of content relative to the objectives for that specific summit
(overall focus, location), and totally ignore the popularity of their
proposers (or their employees).

I understand you had other priorities for you track, that's fair.
Selections are always hard, we all had a lot more proposals than available
slots. I am only commenting on your mention of the results of the
popularity contest. I wish there were clear and public guidelines on the
purpose of the voting process.

/stef
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-track-chairs/attachments/20150817/68360690/attachment.html>