Child pages
  • 2018-11-27 Program Committee

Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  1. Welcome 
  2. Facilitator Andrew Rouner
  3. Discussion of conference "satisfaction survey"
    1. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1m9q1us7p3vBlmp1LLJDVOpKZD5Y4buDNS9AA21e-eIw/edit#responses
    2. highlights?
  4. What were some of the problems we encountered that might be avoided?
  5. Were there ways the committee ran that could be improved?
    1. Possible recommendations (from survey and beyond) for 2019:
    2. Reduce platforms/tools to use in planning/delivering Connect...GitHub, wiki, Google forms/drive etc.?
    3. Which are essential?  Are there other tools that could cover multiple tasks that should be considered?
    4. Define and limit use of Sessionizer–use only for lightning talks and unconference?
    5. Identify someone to work on Sessionizer in initial call for committee members?
  6. RG: try not to scatter lightning talks around lots of spots, maybe a block of 3 or so, maybe or not on presentations day...
  7. RG: things we might want to think about...RG suggesting maybe have the second hour of poster sessions be for lightning talks
  8. this would help with conflicts
  9. Brian recommended sched.com to use in place 
  10. RG suggests we should look at conference software, and we should find some people to talk to about this...i.e. Tom Cramer et al, but note: we don't want to lose level of detail we have with waffleboard etc.
  11. RG: what Host Committee should look at EventBrite b/c of the way it handles email
  12. What is the timeline for calling for Program Committee volunteers and for it to be set?
  13. Write up of these suggestions, for Program and Host Committees respectively, by 2/19?
  14. Hannah:
    1. lack of clarity on access to shared notes session notes at conference–possibly have room captains or other volunteers
    2. crow sourced recording we need to consider earlier on 
    3. noticed plenary speakers–wasn't a lot of coordination on plenary talks and maybe there was some unnecessary overlap
  15. Chris: one thing that stuck out was to have an end of week session for newcomers...things got a little more technical/confusing to debrief with each other...
  16. in earlier Connects there was a developer congress in parallel but it caused problems in past...should be discussed again...some mentioned maybe doing this again?
  17. Brian suggested maybe alongside the partner meeting (day)?
  18. Could we gather and reorganize some of the materials from the past year and previous years, to identify required tasks and timelines, for a more complete picture of what is needed for Connect planning?
  19. WG/IG updates...should NOT go in plenary again, but maybe a better 
  20. RG it (the main document for Connect planning) could be updated or it could be re-written, but we should do something Richard will decide...so Richard, Brian and Andrew will review over next few days to decide how to revise etc....
  21. main document for Connect planning is here: Organizing Samvera Connect meetings wasn't revised for 2017?
  22. Additional items