Open Stack

Hello Stefano,
"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)."
While I agree with you on some of the points, ignoring voting would essentially remove community from providing any input into the selection. Are you suggesting getting rid of voting all together?
Thank you,Egle




Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 11:01:28 -0700
From: stefano.maffulli at dreamhost.com
To: nikacost at cisco.com
CC: openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [Openstack-track-chairs] the meaning of the 'How to contribute'	track

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


_______________________________________________
Openstack-track-chairs mailing list
Openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-track-chairs 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-track-chairs/attachments/20150817/494bfff2/attachment-0001.html>