Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Daniel Silk
Hi Adam

On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 6:11 PM adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> There’s a bit of to and fro about more/shorter talks, and fewer/longer talks. Do we prefer 60 short sharp (15+5) talks or 48 (20+)5 talks?  A lot of people preferred the shorter format; and we are also looking at ways to get more people in the spotlight - offering more space to do so is one way (maybe).

I think flexibility would be good here - there is more time in this schedule for the stream sessions so we can offer some longer talks.
I like Tony's idea (in a new thread) of offering either 20min or 30min slots to presenters - we just have to make sure that all of the streams align.

> Pretty much a constant in conferences is that there will be be interruptions as people move between talks; and there’s no avoiding it. Perhaps we can add some gentle reminders to consider your speakers and fellow attendees when session hopping at the opening plenary.

17 people identified switching between sessions as the thing that annoyed them about the conference in 2018, so we should definitely try to do something to improve this. It was by far the most common "annoyance" out of the post-conf survey.

> On start times - we can’t open the doors to members of the public til 8:30 for a 9:00 start at the moment. However, we also cannot attempt to register a whole lot of people in 30 minutes on day 1, so the conference start time was pushed back to allow an hour to get people all registered. On day 2, the timing is the same because I know I’ll get mixed up if the session times change.

I think we should keep it at a 9am start for the conference days. We can do other stuff to mitigate a 30min rego window like:
 - encourage conference-only attendees to pop down to the workshop rego desk to collect their lanyard etc the day before
 - add more volunteers / more tables for registration to get through people faster

Cheers
Daniel


_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Alex Leith
Hey All

We could make a call on how many talks later, and just try to agree on the length of the sessions now. Last year we changed the talk length to accommodate more talks, but we may not get as many submissions this year.

Regarding moving between sessions, I think there were a few sessions that didn't run on time, and we can try to emphasise with session chairs that each talk should start at the scheduled time, and no earlier. But it's always going to be a bit messy... I think last year worked pretty well, really.

I agree about 9 am opening time.

I agree with John about 30 mins between sessions. Networking is important!

And the final session for the day could be shorter... Also I think moving the lightnings to the end, so that both days conclude with a plenary could work.

Cheers,

On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 at 21:21, Daniel Silk <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Adam

On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 6:11 PM adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> There’s a bit of to and fro about more/shorter talks, and fewer/longer talks. Do we prefer 60 short sharp (15+5) talks or 48 (20+)5 talks?  A lot of people preferred the shorter format; and we are also looking at ways to get more people in the spotlight - offering more space to do so is one way (maybe).

I think flexibility would be good here - there is more time in this schedule for the stream sessions so we can offer some longer talks.
I like Tony's idea (in a new thread) of offering either 20min or 30min slots to presenters - we just have to make sure that all of the streams align.

> Pretty much a constant in conferences is that there will be be interruptions as people move between talks; and there’s no avoiding it. Perhaps we can add some gentle reminders to consider your speakers and fellow attendees when session hopping at the opening plenary.

17 people identified switching between sessions as the thing that annoyed them about the conference in 2018, so we should definitely try to do something to improve this. It was by far the most common "annoyance" out of the post-conf survey.

> On start times - we can’t open the doors to members of the public til 8:30 for a 9:00 start at the moment. However, we also cannot attempt to register a whole lot of people in 30 minutes on day 1, so the conference start time was pushed back to allow an hour to get people all registered. On day 2, the timing is the same because I know I’ll get mixed up if the session times change.

I think we should keep it at a 9am start for the conference days. We can do other stuff to mitigate a 30min rego window like:
 - encourage conference-only attendees to pop down to the workshop rego desk to collect their lanyard etc the day before
 - add more volunteers / more tables for registration to get through people faster

Cheers
Daniel

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


--
Alex Leith
m: 0419189050

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Martin Tomko

+1 on all with Alex.

 

We may have additional capacity based on number of talks submitted ( an applying some filtering ,to maintain and exceed the bar set last year).

 

One additional comment: people could vote for a limited number of talks they want to have longer ( say, one per session and stream). Highest bidding alk wins a larger slot ( for talk or questions, up to the speaker).

 

Re moving between session – I would advise to facto in some explicit interchange time + train the chairs to tell people to NOT move during questions, and allow for change only after the 2-3 questions per talk are answered. From my experience, the major disturbance to the participants was that people were moving during the few QA minutes after each talk – which could be perceived as disrespectful by some  - yet people had to get to other talks. Can we factor in some interchange time, synchronised, and meticulously monitored so that people do not extend their talks to this slot?

 

Maybe wishful thinking, but still…

 

M.

 

From: FOSS4G-Oceania <[hidden email]> on behalf of Alex Leith <[hidden email]>
Date: Tuesday, 23 April 2019 at 3:15 pm
To: Daniel Silk <[hidden email]>
Cc: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>, OSM Australian Talk List <[hidden email]>, foss4g-oceania <[hidden email]>, talk-nz <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FOSS4G-Oceania] [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

 

Hey All

 

We could make a call on how many talks later, and just try to agree on the length of the sessions now. Last year we changed the talk length to accommodate more talks, but we may not get as many submissions this year.

 

Regarding moving between sessions, I think there were a few sessions that didn't run on time, and we can try to emphasise with session chairs that each talk should start at the scheduled time, and no earlier. But it's always going to be a bit messy... I think last year worked pretty well, really.

 

I agree about 9 am opening time.

 

I agree with John about 30 mins between sessions. Networking is important!

 

And the final session for the day could be shorter... Also I think moving the lightnings to the end, so that both days conclude with a plenary could work.

 

Cheers,

 

On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 at 21:21, Daniel Silk <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Adam

 

On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 6:11 PM adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:

> There’s a bit of to and fro about more/shorter talks, and fewer/longer talks. Do we prefer 60 short sharp (15+5) talks or 48 (20+)5 talks?  A lot of people preferred the shorter format; and we are also looking at ways to get more people in the spotlight - offering more space to do so is one way (maybe).

 

I think flexibility would be good here - there is more time in this schedule for the stream sessions so we can offer some longer talks.

I like Tony's idea (in a new thread) of offering either 20min or 30min slots to presenters - we just have to make sure that all of the streams align.

 

> Pretty much a constant in conferences is that there will be be interruptions as people move between talks; and there’s no avoiding it. Perhaps we can add some gentle reminders to consider your speakers and fellow attendees when session hopping at the opening plenary.

 

17 people identified switching between sessions as the thing that annoyed them about the conference in 2018, so we should definitely try to do something to improve this. It was by far the most common "annoyance" out of the post-conf survey.

 

> On start times - we can’t open the doors to members of the public til 8:30 for a 9:00 start at the moment. However, we also cannot attempt to register a whole lot of people in 30 minutes on day 1, so the conference start time was pushed back to allow an hour to get people all registered. On day 2, the timing is the same because I know I’ll get mixed up if the session times change.

 

I think we should keep it at a 9am start for the conference days. We can do other stuff to mitigate a 30min rego window like:

 - encourage conference-only attendees to pop down to the workshop rego desk to collect their lanyard etc the day before

 - add more volunteers / more tables for registration to get through people faster

 

Cheers

Daniel

 

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


 

--

Alex Leith

m: 0419189050


_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

John Bryant
As Edoardo mentioned in a side thread to this discussion, SotM is running a process that allows for the possibility of extending some talks [1].

From their CFP:
* The “Extended talk” submission type: Big ideas need time to grow. For 
talks in this category we will allow double the time (40 min) compared 
to the usual talks. Make sure to mention why your talk needs this 
extended space.
In their case, it's a matter of giving a talk 2 slots rather than 1, but perhaps we could consider something like having some slots that are a *bit* longer, eg 25+5 instead of 15+5. We could ask people to indicate when they submit whether they would like a longer slot if it were available, block out certain slots for the longer talks, and then schedule accordingly. It makes for a bit more of a logistical puzzle to put together, but might mitigate the feedback from many that talks were too short.

Possible?



_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

adam steer-2
hey John, all

We need to bear in mind we have only 48 talk slots right now; and one of our goals is to give as many people as possible the opportunity to talk (inclusivity). In the event we get less than 48 submissions we could reach out to speakers for some extended talks.

Right now I’d prefer to not advertise it as an option.

Cheers

Adam

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 06:09, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
As Edoardo mentioned in a side thread to this discussion, SotM is running a process that allows for the possibility of extending some talks [1].

From their CFP:
* The “Extended talk” submission type: Big ideas need time to grow. For 
talks in this category we will allow double the time (40 min) compared 
to the usual talks. Make sure to mention why your talk needs this 
extended space.
In their case, it's a matter of giving a talk 2 slots rather than 1, but perhaps we could consider something like having some slots that are a *bit* longer, eg 25+5 instead of 15+5. We could ask people to indicate when they submit whether they would like a longer slot if it were available, block out certain slots for the longer talks, and then schedule accordingly. It makes for a bit more of a logistical puzzle to put together, but might mitigate the feedback from many that talks were too short.

Possible?


_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


--

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Daniel Silk
Looking at the feedback we received, there were around 10 responses that mention the talk length being too short.
Around 20 responses that mention difficulty moving between sessions (not enough time allocated or sessions not staying in sync).

If we stick with 15+5 then we aren't really doing anything to address these responses (aside from asking session chairs not to allow talks to start early).

The program overview currently allocates 90mins to stream sessions for 4 talks. This is 22.5mins per talk. We need clearly defined start times for the four talks, so starting at 11:00 / 11:22.5 / 11:45 / 12:07.5 seems cumbersome.

If we push out to 100min we would have 25mins per talk, split into 18mins for the talk itself + 5mins questions + 2mins room change.
18mins seems a little arbitrary but "the 18 minute rule" defines the maximum length of a TED talk.

Last year we squeezed 5 talks into a 100min slot. If we have 4 talks in a 100min slot, I think we'll address that feedback.
We can stick within the 9-5 by reducing the keynote sessions by 10min and making the last session on day 1 3 talks instead of 4. Keynotes can still be 25min + 5min. This still gives 45 presentation slots (same as last year). Program with these edits is here.

Cheers
Daniel


On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 9:44 AM adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
hey John, all

We need to bear in mind we have only 48 talk slots right now; and one of our goals is to give as many people as possible the opportunity to talk (inclusivity). In the event we get less than 48 submissions we could reach out to speakers for some extended talks.

Right now I’d prefer to not advertise it as an option.

Cheers

Adam

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 06:09, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
As Edoardo mentioned in a side thread to this discussion, SotM is running a process that allows for the possibility of extending some talks [1].

From their CFP:
* The “Extended talk” submission type: Big ideas need time to grow. For 
talks in this category we will allow double the time (40 min) compared 
to the usual talks. Make sure to mention why your talk needs this 
extended space.
In their case, it's a matter of giving a talk 2 slots rather than 1, but perhaps we could consider something like having some slots that are a *bit* longer, eg 25+5 instead of 15+5. We could ask people to indicate when they submit whether they would like a longer slot if it were available, block out certain slots for the longer talks, and then schedule accordingly. It makes for a bit more of a logistical puzzle to put together, but might mitigate the feedback from many that talks were too short.

Possible?


_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


--
_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

adam steer-2
Hi Daniel

Those feedback numbers represent 4% / 12% of the whole audience (n=250); and 9.6 / 28 % of feedback providers respectively (n=104)

For context, a number of the complaints about sessions getting out of sync relate to one specific session which had the mother of all tech failures at the start, and the chair (me) decided that letting everyone speak was more important than syncing sessions and dropping a speaker.

It may have been a bad decision but hey. We’re human (alternately, I screwed up on behalf of everyone).

From my PoV shorter talks means we can get more people on stage, and to me that’s a goal worth chasing. Recall also there was also positive feedback about the short talk time; and one of our stated missions is inclusion - which can be expressed by giving more people space to speak.

With 90min sessions a way of fitting 4 x 15+5 min could be:

- 5min (11:00 - 11:05) housekeeping / speaker intros (everyone at every session will get the ‘be nice’ speil, we might get sick of it but hey.)
- 20min x 4 (11:05, 11:25, 11:45, 12:05)
- 5min early finish or extra Q’s / speaker meet n greet / discussion

(or 2min intro / longer final chitchat)

Another idea might be to keep session rooms available for extended show and tells in breaks. I’m sure they were last year but we can make a point of it.

This trades a small number of complaints (which may also be addressable by having back entrances in rooms) against having a few more talks. I’m very clearly in favour of the latter.

We need to have some ideas before a CfP, but we can also say ‘if there are only N proposals, we run X slots, if there are n^2 proposals, we try to fit as many as possible, we’ll let you know!’ (maybe we have two days of lightning talks :D )

Is there a specific reason to close at 5? I think we could push till 5:30 if we wanted to, it’s only two days we need to stay switched on for...

Cheers

Adam



On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 09:00, Daniel Silk <[hidden email]> wrote:
Looking at the feedback we received, there were around 10 responses that mention the talk length being too short.
Around 20 responses that mention difficulty moving between sessions (not enough time allocated or sessions not staying in sync).

If we stick with 15+5 then we aren't really doing anything to address these responses (aside from asking session chairs not to allow talks to start early).

The program overview currently allocates 90mins to stream sessions for 4 talks. This is 22.5mins per talk. We need clearly defined start times for the four talks, so starting at 11:00 / 11:22.5 / 11:45 / 12:07.5 seems cumbersome.

If we push out to 100min we would have 25mins per talk, split into 18mins for the talk itself + 5mins questions + 2mins room change.
18mins seems a little arbitrary but "the 18 minute rule" defines the maximum length of a TED talk.

Last year we squeezed 5 talks into a 100min slot. If we have 4 talks in a 100min slot, I think we'll address that feedback.
We can stick within the 9-5 by reducing the keynote sessions by 10min and making the last session on day 1 3 talks instead of 4. Keynotes can still be 25min + 5min. This still gives 45 presentation slots (same as last year). Program with these edits is here.

Cheers
Daniel


On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 9:44 AM adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
hey John, all

We need to bear in mind we have only 48 talk slots right now; and one of our goals is to give as many people as possible the opportunity to talk (inclusivity). In the event we get less than 48 submissions we could reach out to speakers for some extended talks.

Right now I’d prefer to not advertise it as an option.

Cheers

Adam

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 06:09, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
As Edoardo mentioned in a side thread to this discussion, SotM is running a process that allows for the possibility of extending some talks [1].

From their CFP:
* The “Extended talk” submission type: Big ideas need time to grow. For 
talks in this category we will allow double the time (40 min) compared 
to the usual talks. Make sure to mention why your talk needs this 
extended space.
In their case, it's a matter of giving a talk 2 slots rather than 1, but perhaps we could consider something like having some slots that are a *bit* longer, eg 25+5 instead of 15+5. We could ask people to indicate when they submit whether they would like a longer slot if it were available, block out certain slots for the longer talks, and then schedule accordingly. It makes for a bit more of a logistical puzzle to put together, but might mitigate the feedback from many that talks were too short.

Possible?


_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


--
_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


--

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Martin Tomko

Personally, I find shorter talks are better. Yes, speakers complain – that is, because it is actually an art to make good short talks ( and I am no good at them either).

But some of the best talks in the conference were actually quite short. Who wants to know more, can grab the speaker, shout them a coffee, and keep on until the wee hours.

If we do not have enough speakers, or find gaps, we can always extend. But maybe let’s plan for these shorter slots, as Adam suggests.

 

Martin

 

 

From: FOSS4G-Oceania <[hidden email]> on behalf of adam steer <[hidden email]>
Date: Monday, 29 April 2019 at 1:35 pm
To: Daniel Silk <[hidden email]>
Cc: foss4g-oceania <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FOSS4G-Oceania] [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

 

Hi Daniel

 

Those feedback numbers represent 4% / 12% of the whole audience (n=250); and 9.6 / 28 % of feedback providers respectively (n=104)

 

For context, a number of the complaints about sessions getting out of sync relate to one specific session which had the mother of all tech failures at the start, and the chair (me) decided that letting everyone speak was more important than syncing sessions and dropping a speaker.

 

It may have been a bad decision but hey. We’re human (alternately, I screwed up on behalf of everyone).

 

From my PoV shorter talks means we can get more people on stage, and to me that’s a goal worth chasing. Recall also there was also positive feedback about the short talk time; and one of our stated missions is inclusion - which can be expressed by giving more people space to speak.

 

With 90min sessions a way of fitting 4 x 15+5 min could be:

 

- 5min (11:00 - 11:05) housekeeping / speaker intros (everyone at every session will get the ‘be nice’ speil, we might get sick of it but hey.)

- 20min x 4 (11:05, 11:25, 11:45, 12:05)

- 5min early finish or extra Q’s / speaker meet n greet / discussion

 

(or 2min intro / longer final chitchat)

 

Another idea might be to keep session rooms available for extended show and tells in breaks. I’m sure they were last year but we can make a point of it.

 

This trades a small number of complaints (which may also be addressable by having back entrances in rooms) against having a few more talks. I’m very clearly in favour of the latter.

 

We need to have some ideas before a CfP, but we can also say ‘if there are only N proposals, we run X slots, if there are n^2 proposals, we try to fit as many as possible, we’ll let you know!’ (maybe we have two days of lightning talks :D )

 

Is there a specific reason to close at 5? I think we could push till 5:30 if we wanted to, it’s only two days we need to stay switched on for...

 

Cheers

 

Adam

 

 

 

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 09:00, Daniel Silk <[hidden email]> wrote:

Looking at the feedback we received, there were around 10 responses that mention the talk length being too short.

Around 20 responses that mention difficulty moving between sessions (not enough time allocated or sessions not staying in sync).

 

If we stick with 15+5 then we aren't really doing anything to address these responses (aside from asking session chairs not to allow talks to start early).

 

The program overview currently allocates 90mins to stream sessions for 4 talks. This is 22.5mins per talk. We need clearly defined start times for the four talks, so starting at 11:00 / 11:22.5 / 11:45 / 12:07.5 seems cumbersome.

 

If we push out to 100min we would have 25mins per talk, split into 18mins for the talk itself + 5mins questions + 2mins room change.

18mins seems a little arbitrary but "the 18 minute rule" defines the maximum length of a TED talk.

 

Last year we squeezed 5 talks into a 100min slot. If we have 4 talks in a 100min slot, I think we'll address that feedback.

We can stick within the 9-5 by reducing the keynote sessions by 10min and making the last session on day 1 3 talks instead of 4. Keynotes can still be 25min + 5min. This still gives 45 presentation slots (same as last year). Program with these edits is here.

 

Cheers

Daniel

 

 

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 9:44 AM adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:

hey John, all

 

We need to bear in mind we have only 48 talk slots right now; and one of our goals is to give as many people as possible the opportunity to talk (inclusivity). In the event we get less than 48 submissions we could reach out to speakers for some extended talks.

 

Right now I’d prefer to not advertise it as an option.

 

Cheers

 

Adam

 

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 06:09, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:

As Edoardo mentioned in a side thread to this discussion, SotM is running a process that allows for the possibility of extending some talks [1].

 

From their CFP:

* The “Extended talk” submission type: Big ideas need time to grow. For 
talks in this category we will allow double the time (40 min) compared 
to the usual talks. Make sure to mention why your talk needs this 
extended space.

In their case, it's a matter of giving a talk 2 slots rather than 1, but perhaps we could consider something like having some slots that are a *bit* longer, eg 25+5 instead of 15+5. We could ask people to indicate when they submit whether they would like a longer slot if it were available, block out certain slots for the longer talks, and then schedule accordingly. It makes for a bit more of a logistical puzzle to put together, but might mitigate the feedback from many that talks were too short.

 

Possible?

 

 

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


 

--

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


 

--


_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Alex Leith
Hey Folks

I think closing at 5 is better. I get exhausted after a full day of receiving information! If we are going later, it needs to be really engaging and light by the end.

On talk length, I don't have the numbers, but I read some feedback that was positive about the talk lengths. I think it worked pretty well, as I've said before, and I'd just change some of the session chair instructions to try to keep them on time better.

And regarding the CfP, we can keep the talk length out of it. Just receive abstracts... unless we're going to have short and long talks, then we need people to say what one they should go in. I think we just say 'lightning' or 'regular' talks.

Cheers,


On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 13:42, Martin Tomko <[hidden email]> wrote:

Personally, I find shorter talks are better. Yes, speakers complain – that is, because it is actually an art to make good short talks ( and I am no good at them either).

But some of the best talks in the conference were actually quite short. Who wants to know more, can grab the speaker, shout them a coffee, and keep on until the wee hours.

If we do not have enough speakers, or find gaps, we can always extend. But maybe let’s plan for these shorter slots, as Adam suggests.

 

Martin

 

 

From: FOSS4G-Oceania <[hidden email]> on behalf of adam steer <[hidden email]>
Date: Monday, 29 April 2019 at 1:35 pm
To: Daniel Silk <[hidden email]>
Cc: foss4g-oceania <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FOSS4G-Oceania] [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

 

Hi Daniel

 

Those feedback numbers represent 4% / 12% of the whole audience (n=250); and 9.6 / 28 % of feedback providers respectively (n=104)

 

For context, a number of the complaints about sessions getting out of sync relate to one specific session which had the mother of all tech failures at the start, and the chair (me) decided that letting everyone speak was more important than syncing sessions and dropping a speaker.

 

It may have been a bad decision but hey. We’re human (alternately, I screwed up on behalf of everyone).

 

From my PoV shorter talks means we can get more people on stage, and to me that’s a goal worth chasing. Recall also there was also positive feedback about the short talk time; and one of our stated missions is inclusion - which can be expressed by giving more people space to speak.

 

With 90min sessions a way of fitting 4 x 15+5 min could be:

 

- 5min (11:00 - 11:05) housekeeping / speaker intros (everyone at every session will get the ‘be nice’ speil, we might get sick of it but hey.)

- 20min x 4 (11:05, 11:25, 11:45, 12:05)

- 5min early finish or extra Q’s / speaker meet n greet / discussion

 

(or 2min intro / longer final chitchat)

 

Another idea might be to keep session rooms available for extended show and tells in breaks. I’m sure they were last year but we can make a point of it.

 

This trades a small number of complaints (which may also be addressable by having back entrances in rooms) against having a few more talks. I’m very clearly in favour of the latter.

 

We need to have some ideas before a CfP, but we can also say ‘if there are only N proposals, we run X slots, if there are n^2 proposals, we try to fit as many as possible, we’ll let you know!’ (maybe we have two days of lightning talks :D )

 

Is there a specific reason to close at 5? I think we could push till 5:30 if we wanted to, it’s only two days we need to stay switched on for...

 

Cheers

 

Adam

 

 

 

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 09:00, Daniel Silk <[hidden email]> wrote:

Looking at the feedback we received, there were around 10 responses that mention the talk length being too short.

Around 20 responses that mention difficulty moving between sessions (not enough time allocated or sessions not staying in sync).

 

If we stick with 15+5 then we aren't really doing anything to address these responses (aside from asking session chairs not to allow talks to start early).

 

The program overview currently allocates 90mins to stream sessions for 4 talks. This is 22.5mins per talk. We need clearly defined start times for the four talks, so starting at 11:00 / 11:22.5 / 11:45 / 12:07.5 seems cumbersome.

 

If we push out to 100min we would have 25mins per talk, split into 18mins for the talk itself + 5mins questions + 2mins room change.

18mins seems a little arbitrary but "the 18 minute rule" defines the maximum length of a TED talk.

 

Last year we squeezed 5 talks into a 100min slot. If we have 4 talks in a 100min slot, I think we'll address that feedback.

We can stick within the 9-5 by reducing the keynote sessions by 10min and making the last session on day 1 3 talks instead of 4. Keynotes can still be 25min + 5min. This still gives 45 presentation slots (same as last year). Program with these edits is here.

 

Cheers

Daniel

 

 

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 9:44 AM adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:

hey John, all

 

We need to bear in mind we have only 48 talk slots right now; and one of our goals is to give as many people as possible the opportunity to talk (inclusivity). In the event we get less than 48 submissions we could reach out to speakers for some extended talks.

 

Right now I’d prefer to not advertise it as an option.

 

Cheers

 

Adam

 

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 06:09, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:

As Edoardo mentioned in a side thread to this discussion, SotM is running a process that allows for the possibility of extending some talks [1].

 

From their CFP:

* The “Extended talk” submission type: Big ideas need time to grow. For 
talks in this category we will allow double the time (40 min) compared 
to the usual talks. Make sure to mention why your talk needs this 
extended space.

In their case, it's a matter of giving a talk 2 slots rather than 1, but perhaps we could consider something like having some slots that are a *bit* longer, eg 25+5 instead of 15+5. We could ask people to indicate when they submit whether they would like a longer slot if it were available, block out certain slots for the longer talks, and then schedule accordingly. It makes for a bit more of a logistical puzzle to put together, but might mitigate the feedback from many that talks were too short.

 

Possible?

 

 

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


 

--

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


 

--

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


--
Alex Leith
m: 0419189050

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

John Bryant
I have to disagree that the feedback represents a small subset of opinions - the feedback that talk length was too short was one of the clearest messages we received.

I really like the idea of factoring in explicit interchange time, as Martin put it. Having an allocated 2 min room switch time means that there's none of this people-coming-and-going-while-question-time-is-happening, a big distraction.

Re: the number of people on stage - I really like the idea of being inclusive. But I also feel strongly that we need a selection process, and that not all talks should be accepted. Not because I don't think that everyone has a story to tell, but because a little bit of competition for spaces will, I believe, ultimately help us maintain a high standard of content. In 2019 we are targeting a smaller audience, thus a smaller pool of potential speakers... how do we mitigate this? By adding slots, we're pushing the goalposts a bit farther away.

I feel that inclusivity would be better achieved by placing emphasis on the submission process - ie. find ways to make sure oldies & newbies alike feel welcome to submit, provide encouragement and assistance along the way, and promise things like a 'speakers bootcamp' on workshop day, so that new speakers might feel like they will be supported throughout the process.

Re: talk lengths, I like Daniel's proposed tweaks, it feels like they navigate the issues nicely, while potentially addressing the audience feedback about talk lengths.




_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Cameron Shorter
While I'm not weighing in on talk length, I think it will be valuable to discuss our challenges with speakers, because they can help. We should explain:
* Speaking time is going to be limited, we need the help of speakers.
* We want to pack as much quality content into a short space of time.
* Speakers can help by really polishing their speaches, and helping increase the information density of their presentations.
* How do you do this? Pracice your presentation. Make every word count. Pracice again. Write your presentation out in full before hand. Read it out loud. Trim every word that doesn't add value. This doesn't always mean talking fast. Sometimes silence emphasises a point and gives time to absorb an important point. But make the silences meaningful too.


On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 07:28, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have to disagree that the feedback represents a small subset of opinions - the feedback that talk length was too short was one of the clearest messages we received.

I really like the idea of factoring in explicit interchange time, as Martin put it. Having an allocated 2 min room switch time means that there's none of this people-coming-and-going-while-question-time-is-happening, a big distraction.

Re: the number of people on stage - I really like the idea of being inclusive. But I also feel strongly that we need a selection process, and that not all talks should be accepted. Not because I don't think that everyone has a story to tell, but because a little bit of competition for spaces will, I believe, ultimately help us maintain a high standard of content. In 2019 we are targeting a smaller audience, thus a smaller pool of potential speakers... how do we mitigate this? By adding slots, we're pushing the goalposts a bit farther away.

I feel that inclusivity would be better achieved by placing emphasis on the submission process - ie. find ways to make sure oldies & newbies alike feel welcome to submit, provide encouragement and assistance along the way, and promise things like a 'speakers bootcamp' on workshop day, so that new speakers might feel like they will be supported throughout the process.

Re: talk lengths, I like Daniel's proposed tweaks, it feels like they navigate the issues nicely, while potentially addressing the audience feedback about talk lengths.



_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


--
Cameron Shorter
Technology Demystifier
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant

M +61 (0) 419 142 254




_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Daniel Silk
In reply to this post by John Bryant
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 3:35 PM adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Those feedback numbers represent 4% / 12% of the whole audience (n=250); and 9.6 / 28 % of feedback providers respectively (n=104)

Yep, and they're both right up at the top for most consistent items of constructive feedback that we received.

> For context, a number of the complaints about sessions getting out of sync relate to one specific session which had the mother of all tech failures at the start, and the chair (me) decided that letting everyone speak was more important than syncing sessions and dropping a speaker.

The feedback that I heard during the actual conference was about talks that were starting before they were timetabled to begin and the lack of allocated time to change rooms so people were moving during question time. The feedback collected does not single out the one session that had tech failures. We can give ourselves a free pass on that one and I think your approach was the best option given that sort of delay.

The two breakout rooms this year are separated by a flight of stairs or a lift (Lower Ground Floor and Ground Floor, pretty much directly above / below one another). The distance to move between these rooms is longer than last year.

Please note that my proposal drops only 3 full length presentations but it also includes 2 more lightning talks (arguably the most successful part of our program).
The difference in the number of people on stage is 1 person. The benefit is 3mins longer for all talks and 2mins longer for moving between rooms - addressing both of those key items of feedback received.

> Is there a specific reason to close at 5? I think we could push till 5:30 if we wanted to, it’s only two days we need to stay switched on for...

I always find my attention span is waning toward the end of a packed conference day. If we push that last session too long, I think we'll lose people in the afternoon tea break. A 5pm end means we're consistent across all four days. It's also preferable for locals who need to get home to their families for dinner / getting the kids in bed.



_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Alex Leith
Hey Daniel

I think I agree with you now. I think using the extra 5 minutes, split between talk/questions and specific time for session switching, is a good idea.

Let's also bring together our session chairs earlier, and do a group meeting, so that we can coach folks. We could look at putting some kind of timers together, so that there's a visual cue? That's a nice to have, though. Investing in a bell to ring for 2 minute's warning for each room may suffice (branded bells as session chair gifts? could be awesome swag!)

Closing at 5 is supported by me.

Cheers,

On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 08:12, Daniel Silk <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 3:35 PM adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Those feedback numbers represent 4% / 12% of the whole audience (n=250); and 9.6 / 28 % of feedback providers respectively (n=104)

Yep, and they're both right up at the top for most consistent items of constructive feedback that we received.

> For context, a number of the complaints about sessions getting out of sync relate to one specific session which had the mother of all tech failures at the start, and the chair (me) decided that letting everyone speak was more important than syncing sessions and dropping a speaker.

The feedback that I heard during the actual conference was about talks that were starting before they were timetabled to begin and the lack of allocated time to change rooms so people were moving during question time. The feedback collected does not single out the one session that had tech failures. We can give ourselves a free pass on that one and I think your approach was the best option given that sort of delay.

The two breakout rooms this year are separated by a flight of stairs or a lift (Lower Ground Floor and Ground Floor, pretty much directly above / below one another). The distance to move between these rooms is longer than last year.

Please note that my proposal drops only 3 full length presentations but it also includes 2 more lightning talks (arguably the most successful part of our program).
The difference in the number of people on stage is 1 person. The benefit is 3mins longer for all talks and 2mins longer for moving between rooms - addressing both of those key items of feedback received.

> Is there a specific reason to close at 5? I think we could push till 5:30 if we wanted to, it’s only two days we need to stay switched on for...

I always find my attention span is waning toward the end of a packed conference day. If we push that last session too long, I think we'll lose people in the afternoon tea break. A 5pm end means we're consistent across all four days. It's also preferable for locals who need to get home to their families for dinner / getting the kids in bed.


_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania


--
Alex Leith
m: 0419189050

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

adam steer-2
ok 

- lets adopt Daniels program.

- we will strongly encourage speakers to use timers (most people have one in their pocket, I use one)

- let's try to meet all the session chairs on workshop day (if they’re not giving workshops), but again, that doesn't mitigate the case of ‘last second’ or 'fill in' chairing (me, with the massive technical glitch to boot; also me and a lot of other people at other F4G events I’ve been to).

Alex did a great job of preparing materials for session chairs last year - this shows that even the best laid plans go awry when the rubber hits the floor. It’s no reflection on the chairs or speakers, everyone does the best they can. Yes people are paying to come, and yes we can have a slick professional event if they pay a lot more (noting that even slick professional events have hiccups)

Overall we need to remember, and perhaps impress upon the audience, that it’s a conference bootstrapped by volunteers.


--

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Alex Leith
Hey Adam

An in-person discussion on workshop day is a great idea.

We can do a couple of coaching sessions a month and two-weeks before too. I did communicate with session chairs, but I left them to self-direct a lot... so being a bit more involved in building a common view will help, I think. Building on last-year's instructions should make this easy.

We can also perhaps do a little more to ensure that devices are ready in the rooms, so that session chairs know how things will work and that they actually DO work!

Cheers,

On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 09:58, adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
ok 

- lets adopt Daniels program.

- we will strongly encourage speakers to use timers (most people have one in their pocket, I use one)

- let's try to meet all the session chairs on workshop day (if they’re not giving workshops), but again, that doesn't mitigate the case of ‘last second’ or 'fill in' chairing (me, with the massive technical glitch to boot; also me and a lot of other people at other F4G events I’ve been to).

Alex did a great job of preparing materials for session chairs last year - this shows that even the best laid plans go awry when the rubber hits the floor. It’s no reflection on the chairs or speakers, everyone does the best they can. Yes people are paying to come, and yes we can have a slick professional event if they pay a lot more (noting that even slick professional events have hiccups)

Overall we need to remember, and perhaps impress upon the audience, that it’s a conference bootstrapped by volunteers.


--


--
Alex Leith
m: 0419189050

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Kim Fitter
Hi

Having only session chaired once, we had good set of email instructions and that was fine I thought. The chairs used  paper pads written with 5 mins, 1 min countdown and this worked well. It takes the timing pressure off the speaker and makes them look around :) We also had our laptops at the ready as back up.

I have had one workshop major glitch before and will always carry a USB now.

Cheers
Kim



On Tuesday, 30 April 2019, 12:03:46 GMT+12, Alex Leith <[hidden email]> wrote:


Hey Adam

An in-person discussion on workshop day is a great idea.

We can do a couple of coaching sessions a month and two-weeks before too. I did communicate with session chairs, but I left them to self-direct a lot... so being a bit more involved in building a common view will help, I think. Building on last-year's instructions should make this easy.

We can also perhaps do a little more to ensure that devices are ready in the rooms, so that session chairs know how things will work and that they actually DO work!

Cheers,

On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 09:58, adam steer <[hidden email]> wrote:
ok 

- lets adopt Daniels program.

- we will strongly encourage speakers to use timers (most people have one in their pocket, I use one)

- let's try to meet all the session chairs on workshop day (if they’re not giving workshops), but again, that doesn't mitigate the case of ‘last second’ or 'fill in' chairing (me, with the massive technical glitch to boot; also me and a lot of other people at other F4G events I’ve been to).

Alex did a great job of preparing materials for session chairs last year - this shows that even the best laid plans go awry when the rubber hits the floor. It’s no reflection on the chairs or speakers, everyone does the best they can. Yes people are paying to come, and yes we can have a slick professional event if they pay a lot more (noting that even slick professional events have hiccups)

Overall we need to remember, and perhaps impress upon the audience, that it’s a conference bootstrapped by volunteers.


--


--
Alex Leith
m: 0419189050
_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo Oceania] FOSS4G SotM Oceania 2019 - programme outline

Kim Fitter
In reply to this post by John Bryant
Hi again,

I also agree on finishing at 5pm and for consistency in the schedule. It means there is also time for a  break to make phone calls or just go for a walk before the evening dos for all types of -verts. 

I agree with John on the the number of people on stage, and putting some effort in the selection process. In my experience finding speakers, there is a lot of shoulder tapping, gentle and persuasive encouragement needed, not just a single call for a speakers. A speaker workshop also doubles up as a good networking event for newbies, TGP and others. Another suggestion is to allow a talk by a workshop presenter. There are so many good workshop options and if you know that these will also be presented as a short talk then you don't feel as much FOMO.

Cheers
Kim

On Tuesday, 30 April 2019, 09:28:02 GMT+12, John Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:


I have to disagree that the feedback represents a small subset of opinions - the feedback that talk length was too short was one of the clearest messages we received.

I really like the idea of factoring in explicit interchange time, as Martin put it. Having an allocated 2 min room switch time means that there's none of this people-coming-and-going-while-question-time-is-happening, a big distraction.

Re: the number of people on stage - I really like the idea of being inclusive. But I also feel strongly that we need a selection process, and that not all talks should be accepted. Not because I don't think that everyone has a story to tell, but because a little bit of competition for spaces will, I believe, ultimately help us maintain a high standard of content. In 2019 we are targeting a smaller audience, thus a smaller pool of potential speakers... how do we mitigate this? By adding slots, we're pushing the goalposts a bit farther away.

I feel that inclusivity would be better achieved by placing emphasis on the submission process - ie. find ways to make sure oldies & newbies alike feel welcome to submit, provide encouragement and assistance along the way, and promise things like a 'speakers bootcamp' on workshop day, so that new speakers might feel like they will be supported throughout the process.

Re: talk lengths, I like Daniel's proposed tweaks, it feels like they navigate the issues nicely, while potentially addressing the audience feedback about talk lengths.



_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania

_______________________________________________
FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania