Opening session for Tempe: 0900-1030?

[Paul W. Frields]

On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 09:23:34PM -0500, Chris Tyler wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 18:01 -0600, Ian Weller wrote:
> > 15 seconds is enough for someone to pitch a session if they've given
> > enough thought about it. Then paper + marker table after that, and it
> > gets handed off to the people making voting happen.
> 
> I suggest paper+marker table first -> people see the talk title clearly
> and they know what the sign looks like so they can find it more easily
> when checkmark-voting. Bonus points for a document projector.

Agree, paper+marker first sounds more logical.

Ian brought up a good point, which is that not everyone will have
read, or be reading, the wiki.  Unfortunate, but true, so constraining
the time should work OK.  15 seconds per talk means 60 pitches take a
total of 15 minutes -- and that should work out OK.

I think there should be no "handoff" for voting.  All speakers are
responsible for maninpulating the schedule, not just a few minders.
Greg DeKoenigsberg pointed out that having only a couple people
working on the schedule is a bottleneck where BarCamp is concerned.
It's not vital the speakers rush out to tack things up on the schedule
immediately after a pitch, but it should be the crowd that fixes the
schedule.  With short pitches, there should be plenty of time for
voting and rearranging.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
          Where open source multiplies: http://opensource.com