Flock proposals now open for community voting
rwheeler at redhat.com
Mon Jun 10 17:50:05 UTC 2013
On 06/04/2013 10:22 AM, seth vidal wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Jun 2013 10:16:22 -0400
> Przemek Klosowski <przemek.klosowski at nist.gov> wrote:
>> On 06/04/2013 10:02 AM, Tom Callaway wrote:
>>> On 06/04/2013 09:55 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>>> What's even weirder is that some folks are explicitly mentioned
>>>> (such as Jon Masters) in the descriptions, so the playing field
>>>> isn't actually that levelled after all?
>>> Only people who refer to themselves by name in their own abstracts
>>> (or describe themselves in such a way that it is obvious who they
>>> are) ended up like this. We honestly didn't think that was going to
>>> This was an experiment. If it doesn't work, we don't have to do it
>> In general, it's not surprising that the author often could be
>> divined from the abstract---after all, they are going to talk about
>> their own project (e.g. Lennart on systemd, Ajax on X driver
>> infrastructure, Dan Walsh on SELinux, etc). There just doesn't seem
>> to be a way to avoid that, and besides, past reputation does predict
>> future performance. It's for the editorial board to implement a
>> diversity policy by inviting the young'uns, if they wish so.
> I disagree - this lets people judge proposed talks/sessions on what is
> I think it's a good idea and, if nothing else, it is just a
> good trial. And that's enough.
It is a very common thing to do in the academic world (conferences like the
USENIX FAST conference I am involved in do this).
The upside is that speakers who are not well known are given a chance to break
in with a good proposal.
In the academic world, it does more good than harm I think.
It will be interesting to see how it works in the open source space :)
More information about the devel