On Mon, Jun 19, 2017, at 11:17 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 04:16:04PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> We've been yelled at before to keep it under 5 tracks because people
> find more than that way too many. Something about impossible to
> attend everything they want to see while simultaneously not having any
> time for hallway track.
I dunno about "yelled", but I sure do have a strong opinion. I think
too many simultaneous talks reduces collaboration across groups because
there's too many people who go to the thing they're most comfortable
with and then it's the five people there who could just as well be
giving the talk.
Which, actually, might be just fine for "do" sessions. But....
I strongly support 5 tracks max. I think more than that is too hard for
most people to conceptually parse. They wind up trying to figure out
how to eliminate entire tracks from consideration. That works when an
event has real tracks. Flock may not ...
> I'd also note that your submissions still heavily favor
talks vs. "do"
> things. Maybe the attendees prefer the talks?
I'm still getting a lot of feedback from people who feel that they need
to be a speaker with a traditional talk in order to get funding.
Same here. This is a message that will take a few Flocks to sink in. I
think when funding decisions are made we need to be able to demonstrate
that this statement is true in order for people to believe it.
regards,
bex