Open Stack

That's correct. This round should only be for reviewing for duplicates, 
etc... and for moving tracks to the correct track.

Edgar Magaña Perdomo wrote:
> IMHO, we should not be voting yet. We should just recommend new tracks 
> for sessions that we believe they will fit better. After the public 
> voting we can properly start our own rating.
>
> Edgar
>
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Affan Ahmed Syed <asyed at plumgrid.com 
> <mailto:asyed at plumgrid.com>> wrote:
>
>     I also think that keeping metadata of track from which a talk has
>     moved is also useful information for the new track chair (in case
>     they disagree with the new location).
>
>     Affan
>
>
>     On Jul 22, 2016 8:23 PM, "Kyle Mestery" <mestery at mestery.com
>     <mailto:mestery at mestery.com>> wrote:
>
>         I think the missing piece is that when voting -1, a comment on
>         *why*
>         you voted -1 would be good. And carrying those votes to
>         another track
>         makes sense to me. There's no reason the chairs in the new
>         track need
>         to take the previous votes into consideration, but removing them
>         doesn't make sense either.
>
>         On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Amrith Kumar
>         <amrith at tesora.com <mailto:amrith at tesora.com>> wrote:
>         > Kyle, if you look at the talk in question, there's no reason
>         (that I can see) for the -1.
>         >
>         > Can you?
>         >
>         > So I have no idea where that person rated it -1. Was it
>         because he felt it was a product pitch, or because he (or she)
>         felt it lacked content? Was it because it was inappropriate in
>         the track where he (or she) rated it?
>         >
>         > Or am I supposed to email that reviewer and ask? Or should
>         we mandate that -1's should have reasons?
>         >
>         > All options, not sure what the right one is.
>         >
>         > -amrith
>         >
>         >
>         >> -----Original Message-----
>         >> From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mestery at mestery.com
>         <mailto:mestery at mestery.com>]
>         >> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 11:10 AM
>         >> To: Amrith Kumar <amrith at tesora.com <mailto:amrith at tesora.com>>
>         >> Cc: openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org
>         <mailto:openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org>
>         >> Subject: Re: [Openstack-track-chairs] reset statistics when
>         a talk is
>         >> moved
>         >>
>         >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Amrith Kumar
>         <amrith at tesora.com <mailto:amrith at tesora.com>> wrote:
>         >> > When a talk is moved from one track to another, I believe
>         that it would
>         >> be a good thing if the ratings on the talk are reset.
>         >> >
>         >> > Consider this talk as an example:
>         >> >
>         >> >
>         https://www.openstack.org/track-chairs/browse/14981?category=73
>         >> >
>         >> > It was given a -1 by someone (I won't mention names
>         because this is
>         >> going to the ML).
>         >> >
>         >> > Also the talk was moved on the request of a reviewer into
>         another track
>         >> (hi reviewer, long time no talk).
>         >> >
>         >> > Now, as I see the talk, it still retains the -1 which is
>         likely no
>         >> longer relevant or appropriate.
>         >> >
>         >> > Yet the -1 is used in computing the talks 'score'.
>         >> >
>         >> > Thanks,
>         >> >
>         >> I actually disagree and think the -1 still holds value,
>         same as a +1
>         >> would hold value. I'm not sure why you think a track
>         chair's vote
>         >> (even if not in the same track) isn't worth retaining post
>         move to be
>         >> honest.
>         >>
>         >> > -amrith
>         >> >
>         >> > _______________________________________________
>         >> > Openstack-track-chairs mailing list
>         >> > Openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org
>         <mailto:Openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org>
>         >> >
>         http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-track-
>         >> chairs
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Openstack-track-chairs mailing list
>         Openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org
>         <mailto:Openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org>
>         http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-track-chairs
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Openstack-track-chairs mailing list
>     Openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org
>     <mailto:Openstack-track-chairs at lists.openstack.org>
>     http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-track-chairs
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Edgar
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160722/9449be18/attachment.html>