Just to clarify,
+1 on only one accepted presentation per person
-1 on only one submission per person
Sorry for any confusion.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Edward M. Corrado <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Jay Luker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > As a conference-goer I dislike the idea of limiting proposal submissions
> > for the same reason I dislike term limits: it doesn't let *me* choose
> > all possibilities. The restriction cuts both ways in that it doesn't just
> > put a limit on presenters but on my choices as well.
> > --jay
> I would argue that multiple submissions limits me as a voter as well.
> If a person with multiple proposals gets more then one accepted, the
> one I wanted more could be dropped, and if I knew it would have been
> dropped, I might have voted for a presentation from someone else on a
> related topic higher.
> Unless we have a completely open schedule, voters, presenters, and
> conference goers are all limited in some way.
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]>
> >> On Nov 28, 2012, at 9:53 AM, Edward M. Corrado <[log in to unmask]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I favor limiting up front. One of the issues we have been discussing
> >> > is that perception that Code4Lib is not as inclusive as it can or
> >> > should be. I believe having multiple proposals from the same person(s)
> >> > and, for that matter, multiple proposals from the same institution(s),
> >> > does nothing to help counter this perception, and possibly perpetuates
> >> > it.
> >> Since I'm pretty intimately aware of the minutiae of the proposals
> >> I have to load them one-by-one into the diebold-o-tron every year), I am
> >> pretty sure that multiple proposal submission is not the exclusive
> >> of conference veterans.
> >> It is a pretty healthy mix of people I know and people I don't.
> >> While I still stick to not having a problem with multiple submissions, I
> >> can see an issue in the case of second proposals that are similar to
> >> proposals. That said, the process is never going to be perfect, having
> >> some editorial discretion on the part of the program committee seems to
> >> to mitigate the worst of the downsides.
> >> -Ross.