[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Access to feedback
|
Hi,
I dont think that this makes any difference. If someone choose not to comment that is unfortunate but the way it is. Equally we get comments and immediately we think "well why do think that…." in terms we as speaker likes to start a discussion.
As an example I got the +0 comment "Nothing really new, most stuff presented was obvious, the title was a little bit misleading, I was expecting something more technical."
For the talk "Desktop apps on table devices". My immediate question is "why didnt you read the abstract which clearly states that this was a UI talk ?". Not sure that such a discussion is fruitful and lead to anything. We cannot convince a voter that his/her vote is wrong.
I understand we like to understand the reason for –1. Maybe we read too much in a single –1. For example the drone keynote got a lot +1 (37) but also –1(18). That is a clear statement and some of the –1 ones even made a comment. Maybe a single minority vote (like a single –1 or a single +1) should just be ignored.
I also got comments like "this could have been a standard talk" (just from one person). This might be the true opinion (although we had like 90 slides) or it might be simply because a speaker had his extended talk proposal rejected or changed to a standard talk. While I am sure interested in the reason if its just one person, maybe I shouldnt read tooo much into it.
At least my 2 cent
christian
Hi,
actually I have another feedback about the votings. It would be gerat if we could motivate people to give more textual comments, or even make it manditory, especially if they vote "-1". If we look at Cedric's talk as an example, the one Ian just posted. We
have many "+1" so the talk was obviously great. As I attended it myself, I can even personally confirm that :-) However, there is one "-1" and because there is no comment, we and the speaker can learn nothing from this vote. Has sb. accidently clicked "-1"?
Was sb. offended that Cedric did not talk about his/her project? Did sb. espect a different content? Was the microphone volume to low? Or was it just sb. who didn't like the talk?
So the suggestion would be to make comments manditory on 0 and -1, what do you think? I do not espect to retrieve fewer votes. If sb. takes the effort to log in, select the talk and click -1, he/she probably would also write one or two sentences.
Regards
Jonas
Am 01.11.2012 19:03, schrieb Ian Skerrett:
Fyi, the PC members now have access to the comments for each talk. For each talk, you should see an evaluation summary tab.
Ex,
http://www.eclipsecon.org/europe2012/node/975/summary/feedback
We don’t make the individual comments public so please keep these private to the PC.
Ian
---------------------------------------
Ian Skerrett
VP of Marketing and Ecosystem
Eclipse Foundation
twitter: @ianskerrett
Plan to attend
EclipseCon 2013 and
ALM Connect
Boston, MA March 25-28 2013
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxxhttps://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
--
Dr. Jonas Helming
Software Engineer / Consultant / General Manager
EclipseSource Munich
Email: jhelming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web: http://eclipsesource.com/munich
Phone: +49 89 21 555 301 - 1
Fax: +49 89 21 555 301 - 9
Mobile: +49 1703151698
EclipseSource München GmbH
Agnes-Pockels-Bogen 1
80992 München
General Managers: Dr. Jonas Helming, Dr. Maximilian Kögel
Registered Office: Sailerstraße 5, 80809 München, Commercial Register
München, HRB 191789
-------------------------------------------------------------
compeople AG
Untermainanlage 8
60329 Frankfurt/Main
Vorstand: Jürgen Wiesmaier
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Christian Glanz
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Frankfurt/Main
Handelsregister Frankfurt HRB 56759
USt-IdNr. DE207665352
-------------------------------------------------------------
