Re: [guadec-list] Re: Barcelona report

On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 18:58 +0200, David Neary wrote:
> Hi,
> Murray Cumming wrote:
> > Time for a wiki page then? 
> I'd be happier if someone would summaries this thread, including the bit 
> on foundation-list (why did that drop off the CC?), and perhaps we could 
> start with a provisional plan of what GUADEC will be like.
> We could then make the wiki page and have an IRC meeting (yarrr, maybe?).
> > Is there any reason to think we need anything other than the same number
> > (and types) or rooms that we had in Stuttgart
> At least one reason... there were a number of things that didn't work 
> well in Stuttgart that need to be fixed. We once again had too many 
> parallel sessions, too much stuff on the schedule, too many 
> unanticipated sessions that had to be added in the weeks before the 
> conference.

What is the rationale to claim we had too many sessions at GUADEC in
Stuttgart? I hear this repeated by some as an absolute truth, but I
never seen anyone give any explanation for it. In my opinion having a
wider range of tracks just increase the likelihood that there is
something interesting on at any given time. And while it might lead to
two talks you would like to attend to being at the same time that would
be true of any setup with more than 1 track. Or is the worry the
opposite that if there are to many tracks people will always find one
interesting to go to which cause people to schmooze less.

Also as far as I know there wasn't any non-userday tracks that where
consistently lacking participants, rather the opposite.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]