<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Folks -<br>
I will weigh in on this topic as well. Agree with the others that
limiting the number of submissions for session for each person to
3-4 as others have said seems reasonable. That would allow people
who are on panels (which I personally like to attend) to be able
to participate in more sessions. <br>
<br>
Also agree that some way to get more information about the person
submitting the proposal would be appropriate. I personally,
unless I know the person will reject out of hand any submissions
that are missing specific biographical information about why the
person is qualified to present/discuss the proposed topic. Maybe
any proposals that are missing critical pieces of information,
should be rejected before they even get to the vote.<br>
<br>
I do not agree that the person needs to be vetted for their
ability to lead/speak a session. While we have had some weak
presentations, I think that it is important to give people who
might be shy/not comfortable with English/or otherwise not good
presenters an opportunity to speak. One suggestion is to offer a
couple of webinar training/coaching sessions on how to deliver a
dynamic session. I would be happy to volunteer to put something
like this together. I have a teaching background and have done
extensive coaching on this topic in the past.<br>
<br>
As for the track chair process it has always been a bit of a
mystery to me, but certainly the people I have worked with as
track chairs have always been great to work with. Also suggest we
take all the suggestions about the tools that I and others
developed to help with the process of winnowing down the hundreds
of proposals so that will be easier to do.<br>
<br>
Beth<br>
</font><br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/9/2015 3:44 PM, Lauren Sell
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:F26CB4C8-7730-4C21-AFE4-B2D5D6F9D2C3@openstack.org"
type="cite">Hello Tokyo Summit track chairs,<br class="">
<br class="">
We’re moving quickly to open the call for speakers for the Austin
Summit next week and want to make sure we incorporate feedback
from prior discussions on this list. Unfortunately, we didn’t have
much turnout in Tokyo for the Summit tools & processes
session, where we were hoping to facilitate more discussion. We
only had two people show up (outside of Foundation staff), so we
primarily discussed the mobile app and reviewed the prototype.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Based on earlier feedback in this thread, there is a desire to
manage the growing number of submissions while increasing the
quality. We have two levers we could pull for the submission
process, but need to make decisions by the end of this week:<br
class="">
1. Do we want to cap the number of sessions that each person can
submit at 5?<br class="">
2. Do we want to add any questions or requirements to the
submission form? See suggestions below. <br class="">
<br class="">
For #2, we are already making a few minor changes this round to
improve session tagging and ask speakers for “links to past
presentations” and “areas of expertise.” For the session
submission, we currently ask:
<div class="">
<ul class="">
<li class="">Session Title </li>
<li class="">Session level (beginner, intermediate, advanced)</li>
<li class="">Abstract</li>
<li class="">Short Description (450 characters max for YouTube
and mobile app)</li>
<li class="">Select track from dropdown</li>
<li class="">Tags</li>
</ul>
</div>
I would suggest consolidating the abstract and short description
to be one question (because submitters often copy/paste it
anyway), and then ask a few additional questions:<br class="">
<ul class="">
<li class="">Who is the intended audience for your session?
Please be specific.</li>
<li class="">What is the problem or use case you’re addressing
in this session?</li>
<li class="">What should attendees expect to learn?</li>
</ul>
We are also making a few changes to the tracks, primarily grouping
them into content categories to better promote and layout the
content across the week. <br class="">
<br class="">
Finally, we will very soon need to select the next round of track
chairs. The Foundation has typically accepted nominations from the
community and appointed track chairs based on subject matter
expertise, contributions, working group involvement, etc. To help
bring in new perspectives, one proposal was to ask track chairs to
decide two people from their team who would continue for the next
cycle and nominate two new people from the community to keep
things fresh. We’ve gotten a lot of feedback that another
community vote for track chairs is not desirable, but we could
more broadly communicate the window for nominations. We’re
accepting nominations now (email <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:summit@openstack.org" class="">summit@openstack.org</a>)
and hope to have track chairs decided by mid-January. Any thoughts
on the process? <br class="">
<br class="">
Thanks,<br class="">
Lauren
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Openstack-track-chairs mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Openstack-track-chairs@lists.openstack.org">Openstack-track-chairs@lists.openstack.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-track-chairs">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-track-chairs</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
_____________________________________________________________________
Beth Cohen
Luth Computer Specialists, Inc.
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.luthcomputer.com">www.luthcomputer.com</a>
15 Wellington Street
Arlington, MA 02476
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bfcohen@luthcomputer.com">bfcohen@luthcomputer.com</a>
Cell 617-721-7256
781-646-4018
Twitter: @bfcohen
Skype: bfcohen100</pre>
</body>
</html>