Open Stack

+ 1 limit number of submissions for each speaker.  Love what Stefano is proposing below to make all the submissions from a given speaker visible on chair tool.

I actually think limiting number of submissions per company is also good idea - but I see the concerns associated with it too, as others pointed.  If needed we can bring this idea back on the table for the next summit.  I will say that sizable number of 'weeding out' we did involved same speakers or same company trying to submit similar sessions in multiple tracks. It felt like they want to test their luck in each track and see which one sticks.  In this case limiting number of sessions per company can helps.  What Stefano proposed for speakers can also be applied to companies - although the list may get super long for some companies.

As far as track chairs selection - I am not sure how it’s done today, but I think the team is doing a great job selecting track chairs.  I’ve always had quality engagement with my track chairs.  Seems like Beth has similar experience.  I like Duncan’s suggestion to limit track chairing to say no more than 3 summits in a row.  Use this as a thumb rule and let the current team continue however they picked the chairs for the past summits.


-Manju




On 12/9/15, 4:27 PM, "Stefano Maffulli" <stefano.maffulli at dreamhost.com> wrote:

>On 12/09/2015 02:02 PM, Kevin Bringard (kevinbri) wrote:
>> I mostly agree with all of these ideas, but especially the submission
>> cap. I think it'll actually make submitters happier as well; I can't
>> count the number of times I've heard people say "Man, I submitted 5
>> talks and they all got accepted. This summit is going to be hell".
>
>They created that problem for themselves, I have hardly any sympathy :)
>
>That said, if we want to avoid getting the same speaker selected for
>giving too many talks, I think it would be a lot more effective to make
>their multiple submissions visible in the voting panel *and* more
>importantly in the chair tool. This way if someone has submitted many
>similar talks to different tracks, the plot will be unveiled and track
>chairs will be enabled to save the poor soul from "hell". Limiting the
>submissions to 3 or any number is a quick workaround, a hack, not an
>elegant solution :)
>
>>> * Ask submitter to provide details on other speaking opportunities, blogs and/or relevant experience.
>> I'd be careful about this one. I agree we want to continue to raise the quality bar, but we also don't want to discount an otherwise good talk because the person proposing it hasn't done much speaking before.
>
>In my experience there is a big difference in quality of talks when
>they're done by a person that has spoken somewhere else before, even if
>it's a local meeting at a user group or the local church. I think
>requesting proof of previous speaking engagement is a fair question to
>ask and one that is likely to give us better speakers.
>
>> I think at the end of the day, for me, the question really is: how do we get rid of the sale's pitches posing as talks? 
>
>isn't the job of the track chair to select relevant and good quality
>content and therefore discard product pitches?
>
>Limiting or discouraging the amount of speakers would be good too:
>podium stuffing to get a free ticket is so not cool.
>
>/stef
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Openstack-track-chairs mailing list
>Openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org
>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Dtrack-2Dchairs&d=CwICAg&c=DZ-EF4pZfxGSU6MfABwx0g&r=yPMLvt-2gkDKKSZiboSwnHPxwqVFUq1Tq1fbnAFoPVY&m=a_TmifWgTzoRc1p0LBXBO_ayW9PC0WmloSQ0DJxa9LI&s=0USzEno4nmN79iEB1EWF0rl42Jk7IXmORCC3XxMGDQo&e=