Re: Thoughts on KubeCon
Ruben Orduz <ruben@...>
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
As a data point, this model has worked fantastically well for PyCon. There are national, regional, state and city conferences. Some have PSF sponsorship, some others just marketing and some wholly self-sufficient. They vary in length and size. Some single-day, single-track, others week long, multi-track. The key is empowering and supporting the local teams.
While in the subject of CFP process, I feel before you implement double-blind or any scheme to improve selection, you must improve the CFP itself. One the one hand we ask proposers to be thorough on the other hand we only allow 900 *characters*. I don’t think any selection committee can make a truly judicious selection of proposals based on 3 tweets’ worth of abstract. I’ve seen this same pattern of short proposal abstract in a different conference I was track chair for; it wasn’t pretty and this should be fixed as priority 0 for next cncf/kubecons, IMO.
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 10:24 AM Matt Farina <matt@...> wrote: