Terça-feira, 16 de Agosto de 2011

Voting on talks - what does it mean?

Whenever you're logged on the site and browse the talk proposals you get an option to thumb up or down each talk.

 

  • When should I thumb up a talk?

When you think it should feature on the program, regardless of whether you'd be interested in attending it yourself.

  • When should I thumb down a talk?

When you think it's inappropriate for the event, and this may be due to a series of different reasons: an incomprehensible or almost non-existing abstract, a subject that has been addressed time and time again and thus bring absolutely nothing new to any attendee, etc.

  • What happens after I rate a talk?

A couple of weeks from now our panels of advisors will be doing the same thing you're doing now (we're still talking about the thumbs up/down); after that, the organizers will get all that information and select the talks to approved based on the interest they seem to generate.

 

A few other aspects will also be accounted for; last year, for instance, we had to turn down a couple of very interesting talks simply because there were several other talks on the same subject that had already been accepted.

  • Wouldn't it be interesting if apart from the thumbs up/down there was a way of marking the talks one *really* wants to see? Like "favourites", perhaps? And eventually get a personalized schedule?

You know... We were thinking the same thing...

tags:

publicado por jac às 10:00
link do post | comentar
|