Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Access to feedback

["Ian Skerrett" <ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Christian, it is very difficult to ‘force’ someone to provide feedback. If we made comments mandatory we would likely get either fewer evaluations or the comments would be garbage.

 

When looking at the feedback I don’t think you can look at individual votes but look for trends. I find it useful to see what were the top sessions and speakers but also what talks and speaker really did not do a good job.

 

 

 

From: eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Campo, Christian
Sent: November-02-12 6:15 AM
To: Eclipsecon Program Committee list
Subject: 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

 

Von: Jonas Helming <jhelming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Antworten an: Eclipsecon list <eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Datum: Freitag, 2. November 2012 10:50
An: Eclipsecon list <eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Betreff: Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Access to feedback

 

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

fon: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 0
fax: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 22
web: www.compeople.de

Vorstand: Jürgen Wiesmaier
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Christian Glanz

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Frankfurt/Main
Handelsregister Frankfurt HRB 56759
USt-IdNr. DE207665352
-------------------------------------------------------------