NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Fame is no guarantee... (Score:2)
Not at all, Nat.
We theoretical, head-in-the-clouds thinkers already hate you! ;-)
Seriously though, Nat does have a legitimate mandate to provide some "brand name recognition" -- in order to attract attendee
Re:Fame is no guarantee... (Score:2)
It's more two to one numerically, but that doesn't take into account the durations: we had a lot more tutorial proposals than we could take.
Re:Fame is no guarantee... (Score:2)
But I'm still surprised contention wasn't higher.
(Of course, if a quarter of those submissions were for tutorials, then that's 136 proposals for maybe 24 tutorial slots, which is better than 5:1.)
Re:Fame is no guarantee... (Score:2)
Yeah, I was thinking "I could have schedule two more for every one I coudl take", hence 2:1.
Proposal numbers would have been higher if we'd had been more on the ball with PHP and PostgreSQL CFPs. Both those tracks were unnaturally muted, because we dropped the ball getting the word out. (Bruce from PostgreSQL was mysteriously not on the committee mailing list, etc.) It was like an OSCON gypsy curse :( We only managed to get a good lineup for those tracks by dint of much last-minute scrabbling.
--Nat
Reply to This
Parent
Re:Fame is no guarantee... (Score:2)
Re:Fame is no guarantee... (Score:2)
--Nat