Re: Improvement Feedback on KubeCon/CloudNativeCon NA 2018

Michael Hausenblas <mhausenb@...>

Thanks a lot for putting this together, Matt!

Huge +1 for track chairs.


Michael Hausenblas, Developer Advocate
OpenShift by Red Hat
Mobile: +353 86 0215164 | Twitter: @mhausenblas |

-----Original Message-----
From: Shannon Williams <shannon@...>
Reply: Shannon Williams <shannon@...>
Date: 19 December 2018 at 08:34:06
To: alexis richardson <alexis@...>
Cc: Matt Farina <matt@...>, CNCF TOC
<cncf-toc@...>, Janet Kuo <chiachenk@...>,
bryanliles@... <bryanliles@...>, Liz Rice
<liz@...>, Dan Kohn <dan@...>, Chris Aniszczyk
Subject:  Re: [cncf-toc] Improvement Feedback on KubeCon/CloudNativeCon NA 2018

+1 on track chairs. Would be excellent to see actually mutiple people as track chairs.
It would be a great opportunity to expand the number of organizations involved in organizing

Also, couldn’t agree with Matt more that the sponsored sessions in the keynotes really
need to be identified as “sponsored”. I think they really detract from the flow of the
keynote. Perhaps we should consider eliminating this benefit from Diamond sponsors,
especially since the Diamond sponsorship tier has been over subscribed for the last
few events. The keynotes are so important, and we really

Otherwise great feedback.

Best Regards,

Shannon Williams
+1 (650) 521-6902

On Dec 18, 2018, at 3:23 PM, alexis richardson >

+1 for track chairs!

I'd like to see CNCF appoint a permanent Kubecon liaison who can help the conference chairs
achieve continuity.


On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 3:50 PM Matt Farina >
At KubeCon/CloudNativeCon there was a session on improving the conference for the future.
This session was born out of conversations on this list so I wanted to circle back with
some of the material from that session to further the conversation and see about getting
some of them implemented.

Before I share improvements people suggested, I wanted to touch on a possible technical
problem. Both Paris Pittman and I found examples of sessions that people proposed but
that appeared to disappear. For example, in Paris case it was sessions she proposed that
were neither accepted or rejected along with a session that was double accepted.

Dan and Chris, can someone look into the technical process and make sure there isn't a
place where some sessions could be inadvertently dropped or otherwise messed up?

I also want to thank the track chairs. It is an often thankless job. In the session there
were call outs to things people liked and I, for one, appreciated hearing those. Nothing
I intend to write is meant to be a criticism. Rather, it's to share suggestions many people
had looking to continiously improve a changing conference.

Some things people liked:

* Keynotes with a rounded room
* Daycare for kids
* Many women giving keynotes

Some problems that could use more solution suggestions:

* Room changes and sched updating after sessions had begun. Some speakers were late because
of this
* Uniformly, sessions at the TCC were under-attended. If we use the venue again we should
re-think layout
* Finding room locations in sched can be difficult
* Good talks were from end users. How can we get more of these?
* Some reviewers were a bit overwhelmed (e.g., someone reviewed ~120 submissions)
* The SurveyMonkey review application isn't great and reviewers would like something

Here are some of the suggestions from the session:

* Announce sponsored keynotes as sponsored
* Speaker training to help speakers improve their sessions (especially maintainers
who get intros/deep dives)
* Use feedback from previous conferences to inform session selection at future conferences
* Collect videos of previous speaking when submitting selections
* Keep things on the same topic in the same room (tracks have a room)
* Have a dry run of the talks before the day of
* Match seasoned speakers with newer speakers to help work on sessions
* Track chairs - this came up several times by different people
* Capture data on whey sessions were popular (is it speakers, topic, something else?)
* Tracks with diversity (e.g., one of the tracks had 4 of 6 talks on the same project). Some
conferences limit the number of project talks in a single track. Couple this with shared
room/day and YouTube playlist experiences
* Example from an education conference: a 90 minute talk is 80 minuites. The final 10 minutes
was people doing reviews. This captures feedback in the moment from many rather than
negative feedback after the fact
* Example from academic medical conferences: you have to turn in feedback to continue
* Local conferences (like DevOps Days, WordCamp, DrupalCamp, etc) which Chris Aniszczyk
said was in the works
* Posted ingredients lists for the meals for people with special diets
* Having room on badges for things like GitHub handles because that's how many of us know
each other
* Live captioning, at least for the keynotes

Note, I likely missed some. If I did and you remember something please share to fill in
the gaps.

There was no way for me to capture the entirety of the session in an email this short. If
you're interested in more detail please watch the video.

How can we move forward on some of these suggestions?

Also, please feel free to forward this on or loop others in as needed.

Matt Farina

Join { to automatically receive all group messages.