LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  November 2012

CODE4LIB November 2012

Subject:

Re: Proposed Changes to Future Conference Program Choosing

From:

Kyle Banerjee <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 28 Nov 2012 09:58:30 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (56 lines)

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Cynthia Ng <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I'm really glad to see this discussion continuing. It seems like
> there's a good amount of support for at least giving a certain amount
> of sessions over for the program committee to decide.
>

Frankly, I'd favor letting them decide *all* of the sessions, the logic
being that the only reason for a program committee to exist in first place
is to put together a program.

Don't get me wrong. I like approval voting. I like the idea of putting on
what people want. But that's not the same as putting on what people ask for.

When you ask a decent sized population what they want, they'll ask for
things they know they want to learn and people they want to hear from.
What's wrong with that? For starters, it encourages intellectual
inbreeding. Problems, technologies, etc, that affect more people are
favored while things with a more select appeal get deemphasized. But IMO,
the reason to go to c4l is not to learn about X or Y, but to expose
yourself to people and things that were totally off your radar.

Secondly, the program should be a coherent whole, not a collection of
parts. People choose sessions individually without any knowledge of what
else will be on the program. Balance can only be achieved by accident or if
someone is making it happen (i.e. the program committee). People shouldn't
just be submitting things -- the committee should identify talented
individuals who aren't already known and actively recruit them. They should
directly suggest topics to people who know something but have trouble
recognizing how much their ideas would benefit the community. By taking a
much more active role in recruiting presentations, the program committee
can mitigate the self selection issue as well as tackle the diversity issue
head on. It's not like the process wouldn't still be community driven since
anyone can be on the program committee.

As far as the 15% target goes, I think that's a decent goal but would hope
it would be much higher in practice. This conference is all about
participation and sharing. At the first c4l, 100% of the sessions were by
first time attendees. I seem to remember that the vast majority of the
people attending were on the stage at some time. Besides, a lot of people
do their best work early in their careers.

And to all the people reading this who feel shy/intimidated about jumping
in, you're too respectful of the status quo. There are a lot of dedicated
people who really know what they're doing. But you should never be afraid
to call things as you see them. If everyone in a group you like thinks one
thing, and you think another, that doesn't make you wrong -- to believe
otherwise is a substitute for thinking. Creative spark rather than
technical skill is what moves us forward and many of the people who appear
very established were regarded as yahoos not that long ago.

To summarize, I favor having the program committee decide the whole program
and think their process should be informed by voting and goals of the
community.

kyle

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager