On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
bex and I were just discussing this in IRC and I think came up with
good idea. What do you think:
Historically, we require a blog report from funded attendees.
However! This often results posts that in aggregate don't cover all
talks (usually a line or two about many talks rather than in-depth on a
few), and have details better covered elsewhere (airport photos, food
photos, 20 descriptions of the same party, etc.) I'm not trying to say
these posts are bad. Rather, for the purpose of best serving Flock and
the Fedora community, with some minor changes, they could become a
critical tool for improving the community's ability to execute on ideas
/ plans made at Flock, tying into the broader Council goal of Flock as
an event to help us achieve our shared goals for Fedora.
So here's the change:
- We ask funded attendees to select the talks they want to attend in the
- From the list of talks, we assign a funded attendee to cover a talk,
ideally one they were already planning to attend, although in a few
cases we may need to assign a talk we need coverage of that they didnt
indicate wanting to attend. This can be worked out.
- Instead of a 'trip report,' the blog requirement instead changes to be
in-depth blog coverage of the talk.
- For folks less inclined / able to do in-depth note taking for such a
post (e.g., ESL, slow typer, etc.) they could optionally provide video
recording nannying for a session or two or provide photo-taking coverage
for a session or two. Their 'trip report' becomes the YouTube (or
wherever) upload of the session video(s) after the session, or a blog
post with all of the photos they took posted in it.
So the requirement hasn't *really* changed all that much, but the result
is non-redundant funded attendee blog coverage of the event, with more
in-depth notes on what happened that teams could use as resources moving
forward. We could also, if we were well-organized, have a list of talks
that do not have funded attendee coverage on the wiki and recruit
volunteers to cover those to further expand our coverage.
I like the idea. Would such posts be collated somehow? Another twist
or addition might be to help translate the collated posts to a
different language if they are an ESL speaker. We typically haven't
done translation at all.
I have to ask though, what do we do if they don't follow through?