Jump to content


From Wikimania

minutes from other meetings

Sun Jan 29, 2006, 23:59UTC

[edit source]
[edit source]
  • ratify that the CfP text looks alright
  • check the page on the wikimania site it redirects to
  • decide how to update the wikimania site
  • conference submission software
  • split up contacting the lists & people in question (didn't get to)
Condensed notes
[edit source]
  • Conference submission software review: see http://radian.org:8080, which is an installation of Indico, “a promising candidate for processing submissions.” Please visit this test site & beat on it a little. Neuralis says that it can be up & running by tommorow night (Monday 1/30). Angela points out that if we’re going to use Indico, we need to have it ready when the CFP goes out. There are fun features in Indico like calendaring and pdf creation of the abstracts.
  • CFP text is here please suggest any wording changes on the talk page; final version to be approved Tuesday night (1/31). So far everyone seems to like what’s there. The email-distributed CFP will point you to the webpage; directions for submission will be there. (from later: abstracts of submissions should definitely be under an open license).
  • Distribution list – list of email list to distribute the cfp to is here - Please add & amend (& help add list addresses!) as necessary.
  • Wikimania Wiki – http://wikimania.wikimedia.org/ and http://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_papers - what should go here? Whole new site? Various people need logins to this site; if you are one of them let someone (Angela, SJ) know.
  • Are you interested in being on the program committee? Please sign up here and indicate your theme/track of interest. Several people expressed interest in various things; see this page for details. (This is not an indication of who's in charge). Ideally at least 12 people, to perhaps 5 people per track. Hacking days will be organized separately.
  • Future program meetings: quick meeting Tuesday, Jan. 31st 23:00 UTC, to get the CFP, submission software, main wikimania page out the door! Proper program meeting Saturday Feb 4th 22:00 UTC to discussion program team division, etc. See here for details.
[1/29/2006 3:59 PM] <Angela> is there any sort of agenda for this meeting?
[1/29/2006 4:00 PM] <_sj_> you might just suggest some new lists and people to contact on the talk page before you go
[1/29/2006 4:01 PM] <cormaggio> yes, i've made some suggestions, but will try to think of a few more..
[1/29/2006 4:01 PM] <_sj_> ratify that the CfP text looks alright, check the page on the wikimania site it redirects to, decide how to update the wikimania site, split up contacting the lists & people in question
[1/29/2006 4:02 PM] <cormaggio> oh right that's the agenda - not what you were asking me to do ;-)
[1/29/2006 4:02 PM] <_sj_> ;-)
[1/29/2006 4:02 PM] <_sj_> just a sanity check before we start sending out the CfP.
[1/29/2006 4:03 PM] -->| Jerem1 (n=Jeremy@c-67-167-64-50.hsd1.il.comcast.net) has joined #wikimania
[1/29/2006 4:03 PM] <_sj_> and we should schedule a proper program meeting soon, at which people split up according to themes
[1/29/2006 4:04 PM] <_sj_> (we can talk about that now, but I'm hoping this will be very short)
[1/29/2006 4:04 PM] <_sj_> sasha, are you around?
[1/29/2006 4:04 PM] <cormaggio> CfP seems fine to me - for me, it was fine last year
[1/29/2006 4:05 PM] <_sj_> the tough part is where to tell people to look if they want to submit content.
[1/29/2006 4:05 PM] <_sj_> let's waqit anouther 2-3 minutes before discussing the cfp text...
[1/29/2006 4:05 PM] <_sj_> for the time being, check out radia.org:808
[1/29/2006 4:05 PM] <_sj_> radian.org:8080  , that is
[1/29/2006 4:05 PM] <_sj_> this is an installation of Indico, which is a promisinig candidate for processing submissions.
[1/29/2006 4:06 PM] <brassratgirl> sj, are you thinking of putting the cfp on this page: http://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_papers again? 
[1/29/2006 4:06 PM] <brassratgirl> and archiving what's there? 
[1/29/2006 4:06 PM] <Angela> That would make most sense I think.
[1/29/2006 4:06 PM] <Angela> does everyone who needs it have access to that wiki?
[1/29/2006 4:06 PM] <_sj_> No.  We need to set up a few new accounts...
[1/29/2006 4:07 PM] <brassratgirl> Angela, I don't - and I agree that makes sense 
[1/29/2006 4:09 PM] <_sj_> It would be useful for a couple of people (brassratgirl, for starters) to get access to help clean up the wiki
[1/29/2006 4:09 PM] <_sj_> and then we can write the wikimania access-list
[1/29/2006 4:09 PM] =-= mind|wandering is now known as mind|notallhere
[1/29/2006 4:09 PM] <_sj_> and note again that we're archiving the site.
[1/29/2006 4:10 PM] <brassratgirl> sj, can you or someone walk us through what happens with the indico site when someone wants to submit a paper? 
[1/29/2006 4:10 PM] <_sj_> for tonight's work, the CfP we mail out can link to a web page
[1/29/2006 4:11 PM] <_sj_> which we can update slightly as submission-details change
[1/29/2006 4:11 PM] <_sj_> the way indico works is, you register for an account; it verifies your email
[1/29/2006 4:11 PM] <_sj_> and you fill out a small form with metadata about your submission.
[1/29/2006 4:11 PM] <Angela> We ought to decide if we're using indico before we send the cfp.
[1/29/2006 4:11 PM] <Angela> It would be annoying to have different sumissions come into different places just because we change our minds later.
[1/29/2006 4:11 PM] <_sj_> definintely.
[1/29/2006 4:11 PM] <_sj_> the cfp shouldn't specify where you submit;
[1/29/2006 4:12 PM] <Angela> I don't know anything about Indico, but if the only alternative is otrs, I don't mind what we go with.
[1/29/2006 4:12 PM] <_sj_> the wikimania web page might say "we are not accepting submissions at this time; please check back in a few days"
[1/29/2006 4:12 PM] <Angela> Anything would be better than otrs.
[1/29/2006 4:12 PM] <_sj_> quite right.
[1/29/2006 4:12 PM] <_sj_> if you log back into indico, it shows you the status of your submission[s]
[1/29/2006 4:13 PM] <Angela> Please don't send the cfp if the page still says we're not accepting sumissions.
[1/29/2006 4:13 PM] <_sj_> and potentially calendar information, once that is set.
[1/29/2006 4:14 PM] <_sj_> then we should agree on everythig but the submission process,
[1/29/2006 4:14 PM] <Angela> Is there any page on meta yet for listing who is on the program committee? I only found one general list of everyone interested in something, but not specifically program.
[1/29/2006 4:15 PM] <brassratgirl> I'm with angela, I don't think the page should say not accepting submissions if the cfp goes out
[1/29/2006 4:15 PM] <brassratgirl> the wikisym people say "submit through our software, which *will* be available through our site" 
[1/29/2006 4:15 PM] <brassratgirl> and in the meantime, here's an email for questions 
[1/29/2006 4:15 PM] <_sj_> Yep.  
[1/29/2006 4:15 PM] <_sj_> We can wait, if necessary; though I'd love to send the CfP sooner rather than later.
[1/29/2006 4:16 PM] <_sj_> I would feel better about getting feedback from Patrick and Austin, who had been involved with software discussions earlier
[1/29/2006 4:16 PM] <neuralis> I can have Indico fully configured and ready to accept submissions by tomorrow.
[1/29/2006 4:16 PM] <_sj_> before specifying how people should submit.
[1/29/2006 4:16 PM] <brassratgirl> Well, can't we do the same thing, as far as putting an email down & saying that we will have software up? 
[1/29/2006 4:16 PM] <_sj_> angela: the individual teams don't have their own pages yet on meta.  but they should.
[1/29/2006 4:17 PM] <brassratgirl> how many submissions will there be in the first few days after the cfp goes out, anyway? 
[1/29/2006 4:17 PM] <_sj_> I don't think anyone will submit right away,
[1/29/2006 4:17 PM] <_sj_> but we might not want people to scoff at being directed to a page that is incomplete
[1/29/2006 4:18 PM] <Angela> Some people will submit right away, and we ought to be prepared for that.
[1/29/2006 4:18 PM] <Angela> how about we trial the indico thing early next week if it can really be set  up by tomorrow and take a decision on wednesday if it's ok and aim to send the cfp on thursday?
[1/29/2006 4:19 PM] <await> at any conference I've been (even the really important ones in CS theory) the submission site is rarely up when the CFP goes out... 
[1/29/2006 4:19 PM] <_sj_> We can trial the site now.
[1/29/2006 4:19 PM] <await> (so that's a data point.) 
[1/29/2006 4:20 PM] <_sj_> All that would change over the next few days would be interface design... remove the confusing front page, and the trial data that is there
[1/29/2006 4:20 PM] <Angela> Ok.
[1/29/2006 4:20 PM] <brassratgirl> I think saying "check back later for the submission site" is ok; just not saying "we're not accepting submissions". People can email if they have questions about how to submit right away, and then we can tell them to hold their horses.
[1/29/2006 4:20 PM] <_sj_> we should probably set up a subdomain redirect, though.
[1/29/2006 4:20 PM] <await> Angela - I've looked into installing the software I'm sure it's solid but neuralis is by far the best person to configure it etc. it will take me (much) longer. 
[1/29/2006 4:20 PM] <_sj_> for whatever submission software we use...
[1/29/2006 4:21 PM] <_sj_> ("what in the world is 'radian.org'?)
[1/29/2006 4:21 PM] <Angela> is there anything else anyone is keen on trialling other than indico?
[1/29/2006 4:22 PM] <neuralis> Angela: No. I put in serious effort at looking into other solutions, and they're generally bad.
[1/29/2006 4:22 PM] <_sj_> I'll send out an email tonight asking people who have been interested in the program team to look at Indico and indicate their theme preferences on the Wikimania 2006/Program page;
[1/29/2006 4:23 PM] <await> I have to second Ivan's judgement.  The software looks very sold and they have solid people behind them.  
[1/29/2006 4:23 PM] <_sj_> that will give us a better sense of how many more people we need to recruit for the team, and in which areas
[1/29/2006 4:23 PM] <brassratgirl> _sj_ -- I put together a list while you were away 
[1/29/2006 4:23 PM] <brassratgirl> I'll send it to you again 
[1/29/2006 4:23 PM] <_sj_> I have it... the email is drafted but not sent.  though I also couldn't find metameta's email
[1/29/2006 4:23 PM] <Angela> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006/Program_Committee
[1/29/2006 4:24 PM] <_sj_> thank you, angela
[1/29/2006 4:25 PM] <brassratgirl> thanks Angela 
[1/29/2006 4:26 PM] <brassratgirl> Perhaps we should have people specify their track interests, as well 
[1/29/2006 4:26 PM] <cormaggio> how many people have expressed interest so far in vetting papers?
[1/29/2006 4:27 PM] <cormaggio> i remember something about was it 15 people per track.... (?)
[1/29/2006 4:27 PM] <brassratgirl> we definitely don't have that many people yet... 
[1/29/2006 4:28 PM] <brassratgirl> around 12 or 13 people have expressed interest onwiki 
[1/29/2006 4:28 PM] <_sj_> Hopefully we won't need that many.
[1/29/2006 4:28 PM] <cormaggio> hmm ok - that's not too bad to begin with
[1/29/2006 4:28 PM] <_sj_> 5 people per theme should do the trick
[1/29/2006 4:28 PM] <cormaggio> ok
[1/29/2006 4:28 PM] -->| cimon (n=cimon@wikipedia/Cimon-avaro) has joined #wikimania
[1/29/2006 4:28 PM] <_sj_> but we shoudl have more people on reserve for the end of march, just in case
[1/29/2006 4:29 PM] <Angela> 12 would be fine. We only had about 5 last year.
[1/29/2006 4:29 PM] <_sj_> It all depends on how successful the CfP outreach is.
[1/29/2006 4:30 PM] <Angela> is there a list of places to send it to?
[1/29/2006 4:30 PM] <_sj_> More than 30 abstracts per person is a lot to review.
[1/29/2006 4:30 PM] <brassratgirl> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimania_2006_Call_for_Participation
[1/29/2006 4:30 PM] <neuralis> i need to jet in about 3 minutes, but by tomorrow, i will have our tracks up in indico, the test conferences cleared, test accounts removed and the confusing front page removed.
[1/29/2006 4:31 PM] <brassratgirl> thank you so much, neuralis
[1/29/2006 4:31 PM] <_sj_> thanks, ivan.
[1/29/2006 4:31 PM] <neuralis> i'll post to wikimania-l when i'm done with the changes.
[1/29/2006 4:31 PM] <neuralis> sure thing.
[1/29/2006 4:31 PM] <brassratgirl> are there any other comments about the cfp text itself? 
[1/29/2006 4:31 PM] <await> thanks!
[1/29/2006 4:31 PM] * neuralis is gone.
[1/29/2006 4:32 PM] <_sj_> We just have to fix the link.
[1/29/2006 4:32 PM] <await> so i had a question about the "tech infrastrcuture" track.   does that overlap with "hacking says"?
[1/29/2006 4:32 PM] <_sj_> If any of you are on lists that you think you might send the CfP to, please include it on that page
[1/29/2006 4:32 PM] <_sj_> Hacking days will be largely separate
[1/29/2006 4:33 PM] <_sj_> and one thing we need to work out is who is going to organize the hacking days schedule with the devs
[1/29/2006 4:33 PM] <await> hm. but they seem to overlap completely. :( i guess that's my confusion about the tracks... 
[1/29/2006 4:33 PM] <await> mako said he would try to be here. 
[1/29/2006 4:33 PM] <_sj_> hcking days is mainly internal hacking of mediawiki devs and sysadmins
[1/29/2006 4:34 PM] <brassratgirl> await, I think the tech talks will be more structured than hacking days 
[1/29/2006 4:34 PM] <await> well it starts out by says "Issues related to Mediawiki development and extensions;"
[1/29/2006 4:34 PM] <_sj_> more about producing something neat
[1/29/2006 4:34 PM] <_sj_> (even something that might be the subject of a tech presentation)
[1/29/2006 4:34 PM] <_sj_> than presenting an idea or paper
[1/29/2006 4:34 PM] <await> so the same sort of people might be involved ... 
[1/29/2006 4:34 PM] <brassratgirl> Although, I did get feedback that hacking days last year would have benefited from being more structured 
[1/29/2006 4:34 PM] <mako> await: i am here
[1/29/2006 4:35 PM] <_sj_> heya mako :)
[1/29/2006 4:35 PM] <brassratgirl> await: yes
[1/29/2006 4:35 PM] <mako> _sj_: hola
[1/29/2006 4:35 PM] <brett__> hacking days sounds like what architects call a "charrette"
[1/29/2006 4:35 PM] <Angela> I'm not sure the main program team needs to interfere with the hacking days. I'd rather have that be a separate group of people arranging it.
[1/29/2006 4:36 PM] <await> Angela sounds good.   I'll probably be involved in both so I'm asking (too many) questions
[1/29/2006 4:36 PM] <Angela> The developers are going to know what they want to include in it better than we are.
[1/29/2006 4:36 PM] <_sj_> for those who are here, could you make a meeting next Saturday, at one of the regular wikimania meeting times?
[1/29/2006 4:36 PM] <_sj_> right, hence "one thing we need to work out... with the devs"
[1/29/2006 4:37 PM] <Angela> yep :)
[1/29/2006 4:37 PM] <_sj_> there are some neat coordination issues;
[1/29/2006 4:37 PM] <_sj_> we can use program slots to encourage cool hacking days deliverables :)
[1/29/2006 4:37 PM] <_sj_> or an ever-improving public tutorial...
[1/29/2006 4:38 PM] <Angela> Meetings any time other than 1 to 10pm UTC is best for me.
[1/29/2006 4:38 PM] <await> so do we have people for the five themes? 
[1/29/2006 4:38 PM] <Jerem1> Is this a good time to ask something substantive about one of the other themes, too?
[1/29/2006 4:38 PM] <_sj_> await: we'll find out as people indicate their interests
[1/29/2006 4:38 PM] <brassratgirl> Jerem1: sure
[1/29/2006 4:38 PM] <Jerem1> About the "wiki sociology" track: Is that broader than just sociology, including other social sciences as well?
[1/29/2006 4:39 PM] <brassratgirl> what do you mean? 
[1/29/2006 4:39 PM] <Jerem1> People in other disciplines also run surveys...
[1/29/2006 4:39 PM] <Jerem1> including political scientists, psychologists, and economists...
[1/29/2006 4:39 PM] <Jerem1> and questions of reputation and organizational design are discussed in those fields as well.
[1/29/2006 4:40 PM] <Angela> will it be useful to divide the committee into themes, having one person leading each one?
[1/29/2006 4:40 PM] <await> Angela - i thought it woudl be useful but only because
[1/29/2006 4:40 PM] <_sj_> angela: good.  what do you think of asking people to test out indico today/tomorrow, decide tuesday, and send it out tues night/wednesday? that would start the month off on a good foot. 
[1/29/2006 4:41 PM] <_sj_> good, re; the times
[1/29/2006 4:41 PM] <await> lets say I take the first "tech. infrastructure" theme.
[1/29/2006 4:41 PM] <await> I worry I don't actually know what that means because I'm not the person that chose the wording... 
[1/29/2006 4:41 PM] <_sj_> Organizing a theme is really like planning a mini-conference of its own
[1/29/2006 4:41 PM] <brassratgirl> Angela: I think so; definitely having people indicate what theme they want to work on would be helpful 
[1/29/2006 4:41 PM] <await> maybe other people who get involved in the committee but didn't write the CFP will have the worry too. 
[1/29/2006 4:42 PM] <Angela> I'll like to take the Projects and content theme.
[1/29/2006 4:42 PM] <brassratgirl> Jerem1: I think 'wiki sociology' means dealing with the people-side of things -- rather than content or law or tech 
[1/29/2006 4:42 PM] <_sj_> you expect to have similar people attending many sessions; speakers involved will want to be associated with other speakers; &c.  
[1/29/2006 4:43 PM] <_sj_> angela: grand
[1/29/2006 4:43 PM] <brassratgirl> Jerem1: and discipline-wise that could be fairly broad 
[1/29/2006 4:43 PM] <_sj_> I have to merge the section for "note your theme preferences" with the general team page
[1/29/2006 4:44 PM] <brassratgirl> sj - there's a note your theme preferences section? 
[1/29/2006 4:44 PM] <Angela> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006/Teams#Theme_organization
[1/29/2006 4:45 PM] <Jerem1> brassratgirl:  Thanks.  That seems up my alley...
[1/29/2006 4:45 PM] <Angela> actually, it's just gone, so that link is wrong :)
[1/29/2006 4:45 PM] <brassratgirl> heh. ok. 
[1/29/2006 4:46 PM] <Angela> sj: there's already http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006/Program_Committee in case you were going to create a page at [[program team]] which you just red linked
[1/29/2006 4:46 PM] <_sj_> indeed.  we've been calling them 'teams' to date...
[1/29/2006 4:46 PM] <_sj_> mind if I rename the page?
[1/29/2006 4:46 PM] <Angela> Sorry.
[1/29/2006 4:47 PM] <Angela> It was committee last year.
[1/29/2006 4:47 PM] <_sj_> moved.  true :)
[1/29/2006 4:48 PM] <Angela> though it was also "programme" last year :)
[1/29/2006 4:48 PM] <cormaggio> i really have to go, so where do i look in over the next few days? Is it Wikimania_2006/Program or Program team ?
[1/29/2006 4:49 PM] <Angela> Program team will probably be mostly just the list of people.
[1/29/2006 4:50 PM] <_sj_> cormac: keep an eye on /Program for updates; and on the CfP talk page if you can help with that.
[1/29/2006 4:50 PM] <cormaggio> ok, will do - will check this log again if i get confused :-)
[1/29/2006 4:51 PM] <cormaggio> night all
[1/29/2006 4:51 PM] <await> night!
[1/29/2006 4:51 PM] <cormaggio> well, it's night here
[1/29/2006 4:51 PM] <Angela> Night cormaggio.
[1/29/2006 4:51 PM] <brassratgirl> 'night 
[1/29/2006 4:51 PM] <await> do we have someone for "law and policy" or for "wiki sociology"?   
[1/29/2006 4:51 PM] <cormaggio> bye
[1/29/2006 4:51 PM] |<-- cormaggio has left freenode ()
[1/29/2006 4:52 PM] <Jerem1> I'd be happy to do wiki sociology.
[1/29/2006 4:52 PM] <await> mako do you prefer to organize hacking days over the "technical infrastructure" theme? 
[1/29/2006 4:53 PM] <_sj_> again, hacking days will be its own thing...
[1/29/2006 4:53 PM] <_sj_> probably slightly less organized than the tech infra theme :)
[1/29/2006 4:53 PM] <await> right. I can (and probably will) help with both.  
[1/29/2006 4:54 PM] <Angela> Does indico do the whole calendar thing as well, not just the tracking of submissions? It's not clear from the screenshots I saw.
[1/29/2006 4:54 PM] <_sj_> which will have to worry about balancing panels, filling rooms of given sizes, etc.
[1/29/2006 4:54 PM] <_sj_> angela: yes.
[1/29/2006 4:54 PM] <await> but wanted to know if anyone else wanted to do tech infrastructure theme.
[1/29/2006 4:54 PM] <await> maybe neuralis ? 
[1/29/2006 4:54 PM] <brett__> i'll help with hacking days
[1/29/2006 4:54 PM] <await> Angela - i saw calendering yes. 
[1/29/2006 4:55 PM] <Angela> are these the final tracks? http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimania_Call_for_Papers#Topics_and_Tracks:
[1/29/2006 4:55 PM] <await> "Easy creation of timetable and customization of the conference website"
[1/29/2006 4:55 PM] <Angela> I don't see "law and policy" there so I don't know if I'm just looking at the wrong thing.
[1/29/2006 4:55 PM] <await> http://cdsware.cern.ch/indico/features.html
[1/29/2006 4:55 PM] <await> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006_Call_for_Participation
[1/29/2006 4:56 PM] <brassratgirl> Angela: yeah, that one's old 
[1/29/2006 4:56 PM] <await> i thought that was the final version. 
[1/29/2006 4:56 PM] <Angela> would we use it for Registration as well, or should that be kept separate?
[1/29/2006 4:56 PM] <brassratgirl> the one you linked just now is the latest & greatest, await 
[1/29/2006 4:57 PM] <Angela> Maybe the old stuff should be removed. There's a lot of duplication on these pages which only leads to confusion.
[1/29/2006 4:57 PM] <await> Angela - it will depend on neuralis and whether or not we can provide him with adequate support. 
[1/29/2006 4:57 PM] <await> we don't want the conference software going down and Ivan being the only person that can do anything about it. 
[1/29/2006 4:58 PM] <Angela> No.
[1/29/2006 4:58 PM] <_sj_> angela: reg is separate.
[1/29/2006 4:58 PM] <await> Angela - hell yes - about duplication and confusion.  It's not intentional on anyone's part... it's hard ... i find it intimidating editing other people's work. 
[1/29/2006 4:58 PM] <await> i know. i'm not supposed to admit that. 
[1/29/2006 4:59 PM] <_sj_> I think at this point we can merge the two pages
[1/29/2006 4:59 PM] <_sj_> and replace what's on wikimania.wikimedia.org.
[1/29/2006 4:59 PM] <await> Ok. So now we are all looking at the same CFP.  Does everyone know what the "five themes" are? Would it take us off agenda to briefly say something about each one? 
[1/29/2006 5:00 PM] <await> or at least say something about the themes that nobody has claimed. 
[1/29/2006 5:00 PM] <await> brassratgirl - are you willing to take Free knowledge etc.   
[1/29/2006 5:00 PM] <_sj_> we can talk about the themes, if there are any questions.
[1/29/2006 5:01 PM] <_sj_> other program issues should wait for another program meeting; we don't have time for them right now
[1/29/2006 5:01 PM] <await> nods
[1/29/2006 5:02 PM] <brassratgirl> if merging is happening, this page is also outdated: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Call_for_Participation
[1/29/2006 5:02 PM] <_sj_> I'll propose 23:00 UTC next Saturday to the mailing list; then we can work out a proper agenda on-wiki.
[1/29/2006 5:02 PM] <_sj_> Sasha, what did you have in mind re: themes?
[1/29/2006 5:02 PM] <Angela> is this draft old? Or is it meant to replace the one on Wikimania_Call_for_Papers? http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimania_Call_for_Papers
[1/29/2006 5:02 PM] <brassratgirl> old 
[1/29/2006 5:03 PM] <brassratgirl> basis of http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006_Call_for_Participation
[1/29/2006 5:03 PM] <await> well. I'm a little concerned about "law and policy".  ... 
[1/29/2006 5:04 PM] <brassratgirl> await, perhaps by the program meeting next saturday we can sort out who's interested in what 
[1/29/2006 5:04 PM] <Angela> do we need both http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Call_for_Participation and http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006_Call_for_Participation ?
[1/29/2006 5:04 PM] <brassratgirl> who wants to take charge of a track, etc
[1/29/2006 5:05 PM] <Angela> The dates and Submission formats on those 2 aren't consistent.
[1/29/2006 5:05 PM] <await> like i've said all along. I'd like to see at least a skeleton program committee that has vetted all the themes.  
[1/29/2006 5:05 PM] <Angela> what do you mean by vetting them?
[1/29/2006 5:06 PM] <Angela> do you mean agreeing now whether we want those 5 themes?
[1/29/2006 5:06 PM] <await> just a sanity check that the themes make sense to the people that are actually going to be accepting submissions.
[1/29/2006 5:07 PM] <_sj_> That is the purpose of asking everyone for their input on the themes.
[1/29/2006 5:07 PM] <await> right
[1/29/2006 5:07 PM] <_sj_> There has been general agreement from the people who have read the latest CfP that those themes work.
[1/29/2006 5:07 PM] <_sj_> Are there changes you would like to see made?
[1/29/2006 5:08 PM] <_sj_> Speak now, as they say... of course there will always be submissions which don't precisely align with one theme or another.
[1/29/2006 5:08 PM] <Jerem1> Was there some conversation at an early meeting about the possibility the themes may be reconfigured, to some extent, once we see the submissions that come in?
[1/29/2006 5:08 PM] |<-- Emmanuel_Chanel has left freenode ("Leaving")
[1/29/2006 5:08 PM] <Jerem1> Exactly, sj.
[1/29/2006 5:08 PM] <_sj_> Yes, that was suggested at some point.
[1/29/2006 5:08 PM] |<-- delphine has left freenode (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
[1/29/2006 5:08 PM] <_sj_> A convincing argument was made that it is easier to stick with a fixed set of themes
[1/29/2006 5:09 PM] <_sj_> and acknowledge internally that they don't exist to exclude good submissions, but to guide people who want to know what to present about
[1/29/2006 5:09 PM] <await> do we want to add a link to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006/Program_Team on the cfp 
[1/29/2006 5:09 PM] <Angela> I don't think it's necessary.
[1/29/2006 5:09 PM] <_sj_> and to help organize the acceptance of submissions so that there is balance in the final program
[1/29/2006 5:09 PM] <_sj_> agreed with angela.
[1/29/2006 5:10 PM] <Jerem1> Ok, I don't mean to rehash that now, and I agree it's wise to have fairly clear categories.
[1/29/2006 5:10 PM] <await> nods.  
[1/29/2006 5:11 PM] <brassratgirl> await: there seems to be pretty good consensus on the cfp among the people who've said they're interested in reviewing papers 
[1/29/2006 5:11 PM] <await> usually the "program committee" is front and center in a cfp. (at least if my memory serves.) 
[1/29/2006 5:11 PM] <await> sure. I like it. :) but i've spoken to you and sam and others about it... 
[1/29/2006 5:12 PM] <_sj_> for those who came just for the CfP distribution discussion...
[1/29/2006 5:12 PM] <await> http://www.iacr.org/conferences/crypto2006/cfp.html
[1/29/2006 5:13 PM] <_sj_> we're running a bit long.
[1/29/2006 5:13 PM] <_sj_> let's get people to test out Indico, work out the precise wording of http://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_participation
[1/29/2006 5:14 PM] <_sj_> (which needs to be whitelisted)
[1/29/2006 5:14 PM] <Angela> Shall we work it out on meta until it's ready? Everyone has access to it there.
[1/29/2006 5:14 PM] <_sj_> good idea.
[1/29/2006 5:15 PM] <_sj_> linuxbeak might also be pleased to work on a simple version of an updated main page.
[1/29/2006 5:15 PM] <_sj_> (also on meta)
[1/29/2006 5:15 PM] <_sj_> and aim to have agreement on what to send out by Tuesday night
[1/29/2006 5:15 PM] <Angela> if anyone wants to be involved in the program team and doesn't have an account on the Wikimania wiki, please leave your username and email address on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006/Program_Committee
[1/29/2006 5:16 PM] <Angela> shall we meet again Tuesday to finalise it then?
[1/29/2006 5:16 PM] <brassratgirl> are there any pressing wording changes or concerns? 
[1/29/2006 5:17 PM] <brassratgirl> Angela - fine with me 
[1/29/2006 5:17 PM] <_sj_> perhaps for a focused 10-minute meeting.
[1/29/2006 5:17 PM] <_sj_> :)
[1/29/2006 5:17 PM] <_sj_> any time after 2300 UTC works for me.
[1/29/2006 5:17 PM] <_sj_> brassratgirl: can you post minutes from tonight?
[1/29/2006 5:17 PM] <brassratgirl> sure 
[1/29/2006 5:18 PM] <_sj_> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006/Program/2006-01-28
[1/29/2006 5:18 PM] <brassratgirl> are we hoping to have indico up & running by tuesday? 
[1/29/2006 5:18 PM] <brassratgirl> ready to go? 
[1/29/2006 5:18 PM] <_sj_> By tomorrow night, neuralis said.
[1/29/2006 5:18 PM] <_sj_> but people can start testing it now...
[1/29/2006 5:18 PM] <brassratgirl> also by tuesday, we should have a list of places to send the cfp nailed down 
[1/29/2006 5:19 PM] <brassratgirl> again, that's here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimania_2006_Call_for_Participation if there are suggestions 
[1/29/2006 5:19 PM] <_sj_> yes.  and people should sign up for which ones they will send it to, as we've done with press releases, to avoid double-mailing
[1/29/2006 5:20 PM] <_sj_> would 2300 UTC Tuesday work for everyone here?
[1/29/2006 5:20 PM] <Angela> Yes.
[1/29/2006 5:21 PM] <Jerem1> Yes.
[1/29/2006 5:21 PM] <await> sure
[1/29/2006 5:21 PM] <_sj_> sweet.  
[1/29/2006 5:22 PM] <brassratgirl> should 
[1/29/2006 5:22 PM] <brassratgirl> work, that is. 
[1/29/2006 5:23 PM] <_sj_> that wraps up the CfP chat.  I'll send  followup notes to people who have expressed program interest before, and the list.

Tue Jan 31

[edit source]

Second CfP meeting : Jan 31, 2300 UTC

[edit source]


Ratify the email and wikimania.wikimedia.org CfP texts.
Verify there are no urgent problems with the process chosen to handle submissions.
Double-check that people are signing up for whom they will contact, and know how the process of CfP distribution should work on-wiki; set measurable goals for the next program meeting.