 |
 |
> The price of admission to that event is a > > talk proposal, and while perhaps obviously, not everyone speaks, it > > does set a boundary. > > > > It might be tough to find folks to serve as gatekeepers, but maybe we > > should at least require a "why you should let me go to Code4Lib" > > statement or proposal. > > Unfortunately, this would seem (in my mind) to encourage recidivism > more than anything. Newcomers are not going to have the benefit of > knowing "what Code4Lib is about" in their statement and what is > already viewed as a bit of a cliquish cabal will only likely become > more so. > Seems like the "why" part could be skipped or used in lieu of the proposal if the person feels that is more compelling than any topic they'd want to talk about on stage. As far as how to make the vetting process for proposals (for who gets to attend) practical, I suspect that simple requirement would reduce the flow enough that it might not be necessary to disappoint anyone. Rather than have a clunky voting process to potentially examine over 200 proposals (if there are more than spots), that seems to be a good job for the program committee. kyle