Events/2009/Reviewing and Voting
From OpenSQLCamp
As we (fortunately) received more session proposals for the OpenSQL Camp 2009 than we have speaking slots available, we need to decide which talks to include and which ones to reject.
In the interest of fairness, each speaker should have only one talk and the audience would pick the most popular one of several submitted ones. If speaking slots would remain open because of this, speakers can of course give a second talk as well.
The system basically asks for "one vote per person per session", giving the participants a chance to influence the program themselves: every individual can cast one vote for each session by either stating he/she would be interested in attending it (+1) or not interested (-1). Additionally, one can add a comment for each vote to provide a reasoning for his/her choice.
We also need to inform the speakers as early as possible about the acceptance of their proposals, so they can take care of their travel arrangements. Therefore the voting period will close one week after the CfP has closed (Sunday, 26th of July)
- Please note that even though some of the talks are in German, you should add your motivation in English (to make the voting committee's life easier).
- If you don't understand German, please abstain from voting for such sessions instead of downvoting them.
We will facilitate the voting process on two channels:
- Using Twitter: accepting votes and comments via the @opensqlcamp Twitter account:
- Each proposed session has a unique Event ID
- We invite everyone to vote by sending a public or private message to the @opensql account
- People can review and rate talks either publicly or privately. Examples:
- @opensqlcamp 421 +1 (best speaker ever)
- @opensqlcamp 333 +1, 404 +1, 401 -1
- d opensqlcamp 422 -1 (it plagiarizes x y z)
- d opensqlcamp 333 -1 (the speaker REALLY sucks)
- Using the mailing list:
- Similar to the above, people can cast their vote on individual sessions by posting their votes and comments on the OpenSQL Camp mailing list/forum.
Advantages:
- Transparent.
- Fever possibilities of changing/rigging the votes.
- Free and easily accessible.
Disadvantages:
- You need to have a twitter or Google account.
- Often the public will vote for what they want to see but won't necessarily actually be at the conference.
Because of the last aspect, the voting committee will use the public votes primarily as a guideline/indicator, but still reserves to right to make the final call if it feels that the voting process was manipulated or provides insufficient data to make a clear decision. The comments and discussions of that committee will be made in the public as well, e.g on the mailing list or on the OpenSQL Camp Wiki.
