Re: Thoughts on KubeCon


Nick Chase
 

On 10/4/2018 2:06 PM, Liz Rice wrote:
Hi all from a current co-chair :-)  Some great constructive ideas here, this is turning into a good discussion.

On the double-blinding, I was involved in discussions about this after Austin and again after Copenhagen. Both times we came to the conclusion that double-blind wouldn't work, mostly for the reasons Alena & Justin described. I don't recall hearing the two-phase suggestion before though, and I think this is really worth exploring further. 

We'd have to reduce the number of submissions to make that in any way manageable.

Why?  You're essentially doing this now when you narrow things down anyway.

The idea of beefing up the CFP requirements could help (but is it possible we will put off some really knowledgable folks from contributing if we make it more onerous?)

I don't think it's practical to require a whole deck, but a bit more detail is not an imposition, IMHO.

I think we need a bigger pool of review committee participants (who actually do it diligently) and perhaps should solicit more widely for volunteers for that. 

How many people did we have this time?  Did they do the whole conference or individual tracks?

My experience has been with the OpenStack Summit, where each track had its own committee, so reviewers had only a few dozen to a couple hundred to review, not thousands.  That worked very well.

I'm inclined to say we shouldn't allow more than two submissions from any individual, but I don't think it's fair to impose submission limits per company - partly because it would be hard for them to manage, but more importantly this would likely end up with fewer new voices getting a chance, as the companies will no doubt push for their star performers to be on stage.

+1

Perhaps we should document more of the co-chair decisions as we go along? Definitely worth considering, though it adds up to more work for the co-chairs (not that it will affect me as my term comes to an end after Seattle).

Even a multiple choice would be good, and wouldn't take much effort.

----  Nick

Join cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io to automatically receive all group messages.