I agree with Tom. If you look at the links Andromeda sent earlier in this thread, both conference organizers reported dramatic increases in the number of under-represented presenters simply by 1) making the proposal authors anonymous during voting and 2) encouraging (and sometimes personally asking) under-represented programmers to submit proposals. Seems like an easy enough place to start, right? -Shaun On 11/27/12 4:26 PM, Tom Keays wrote: > What makes it work for SXSW is that they have a formal organization -- an > incorporated body, in fact -- that gives them the continuity and structure > to do things that can be highly structured or ad hoc, depending on the need > of the situation. They have to be this way because they are freakin' huge. > It is the fact because they are so huge, and have so many presentation > applications, that the organizers have this sort of latitude to pick and > choose among the best candidates. > > Code4Lib is more like a collective: no central organization, only a loose > set of guidelines, and, thankfully, a lot of engaged individuals with a > good institutional memory to keep things on track (where the definition of > "on track" itself is fairly mutable). We can be this way because we have > intentionally kept the event small. It works, but it can be rocky. > > Would I alter my vote for a presentation due to data that indicated gender, > ethnicity, age, whatever? (Probably not.) Might a presenter be a little > weirded out that these variables were being included as part of the voting > process. (Quite possibly.) Is it even legal to do so? (Dunno.) > > I don't think we're big enough that the SXSW approach of having a central > organizational body make some discreet discretionary choices among the > presentation finalists would actually work. In our context, who would that > be anyway? To achieve the gender/ethnicity/age/whatever balance, they > might have to sacrifice quality in the talks. Quota systems don't work when > the pool is small. And given our open voting system, the people being > passed over will not be happy. > > To me, the solution is not to winnow at the back end, but encourage > diversity at the front end. I think we, as a group, have tended to do this. > As Bess has said, "our community is clearly doing a lot to move in the > direction of inclusiveness." > > Tom > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:44 PM, danielle plumer <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > >> s -- Shaun D. Ellis Digital Library Interface Developer Firestone Library, Princeton University voice: 609.258.1698 | [log in to unmask]