The only thing I anonymized were a couple of author names, as it turns out
(unless I managed to louse up on a previous edit when I tried to redact
stuff). Some submitters may have self-anonymized though. Do you see a spot
where i might have messed up? (You can email me off list if you like.)

Showing the previous response histograms was our attempt to provide some
information on the horse race (per community interest) without giving an
outright ranking.

-Dre (Program Committee)

On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 11:17 PM, Jodi Schneider <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Just voted. Two comments:
> (1) Some but not all institutions/organizations seem to be anonymized.
> (2) Google offers "See previous responses
> <https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf3ODZpy3SiAzIUSTK3piY5
> SYWQzISWBIRkPtDCdSEyG8nkgg/viewanalytics?usp=form_confirm>"
> on form completion
> Awesome batch of proposals this year!
>
> -Jodi
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 2:37 PM Cynthia Ng <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > That's really cool and it definitely shows how amazing our community is
> > that someone will create something like this and then openly share it.
> >
> > At the same time, I will encourage everyone to *vote first* before
> looking
> > at the results, and to not change their results after looking at the
> > spreadsheet.
> >
> > The program committee actually created a similar spreadsheet and debated
> > whether to share it publicly because there have been concerns over the
> > years about the bias in-progress results can have on voting.
> >
> > As the community prides itself on openness and transparency and there
> were
> > no in-progress results last year, we decided to compromise and show the
> > unranked, untallied results so people could still see the results, but
> not
> > specifically where a specific talk is in the rankings.
> >
> > Along with anonymizing the talks by removing the presenters' names, we
> hope
> > to provide a process where the talks will be evaluated on their own merit
> > without the bias of gender, race, repeat or not repeat presenter, how
> it's
> > doing vote-wise, etc.
> >
> > The program committee plans to release the tallied, ranked, final results
> > after voting closes.
> >
> > Personally, I never look at the results in-progress since they can change
> > dramatically over time, and in the years I submitted a talk, I would just
> > end up stressing out about it. =x
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 9:48 AM Kate Deibel <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > > If you want to follow the rankings for the talk voting, I put together
> a
> > > script + sheet that automatically recalculates the ranking. Assuming my
> > cat
> > > doesn't eat the squirrel, it should update every 10 minutes.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1E7sN0vNjT91EV4AbWNH0Ndf-
> upFfuXdz9rlsqxLekcQ/edit?usp=sharing
> > >
> > >
> > > Katherine Deibel | PhD
> > > Inclusion & Accessibility Librarian
> > > Syracuse University Libraries
> > > T 315.443.7178
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > > 222 Waverly Ave., Syracuse, NY 13244
> > > Syracuse University
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Matt
> > > Sherman
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2018 12:52 PM
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: [CODE4LIB] Code4Lib 2019 Program Voting Open!
> > >
> > > The Code4Lib 2019 Program Committee is happy to announce that voting is
> > > now open for prepared talks.
> > >
> > > To vote, visit goo.gl/xvQXyu, review the proposals, and assign points
> to
> > > those presentations you would like to see on the program this year.
> > >
> > > * Voting will end on Thursday, October 25, 2018 at 11:59:59 PM PT
> > (GMT-8) *
> > >
> > > Every year, the Code4Lib community votes on proposals that they would
> > like
> > > to see included in the program. The top 10 proposals will be
> guaranteed a
> > > slot at the conference. For all other slots, the Program Committee will
> > > curate the remainder of presentations in an effort to ensure diversity
> > and
> > > quality using the following criteria (in no particular order):
> > >
> > >
> > >    -
> > >
> > >    Favor first time presenters
> > >    -
> > >
> > >    No duplicate presenters
> > >    -
> > >
> > >    Presentations generally well voted/received by community
> > >    -
> > >
> > >    Diversity of presenters by gender, ethnicity, institution, type of
> > >    institution
> > >    -
> > >
> > >    Diversity of topics/content
> > >
> > >
> > > Those who proposed a talk but are not selected are highly encouraged to
> > do
> > > a lightning talk during the conference. Lightning talks are first come
> > > first serve sign up during the conference.
> > >
> > > Selected presenters will be contacted directly once the program
> committee
> > > has deliberated.
> > >
> > > The complete program will be announced in November. Please check the
> > > Code4lib mailing list or the conference website for the news.
> > >
> > > For more information about Code4Lib 2019, visit
> > https://2019.code4lib.org
> > > <http://2018.code4lib.org>
> > >
> >
>