<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Hi John<div><br></div><div>thanks for your input, and gentle reminder to explain some thinking:</div><div><br></div><div>yes, we’re optimistic that we’ll get a lot of great talk proposals! </div><div><br></div><div>There’s a bit of to and fro about more/shorter talks, and fewer/longer talks. Do we prefer 60 short sharp (15+5) talks or 48 (20+)5 talks? A lot of people preferred the shorter format; and we are also looking at ways to get more people in the spotlight - offering more space to do so is one way (maybe).</div><div><br></div><div>Pretty much a constant in conferences is that there will be be interruptions as people move between talks; and there’s no avoiding it. Perhaps we can add some gentle reminders to consider your speakers and fellow attendees when session hopping at the opening plenary.</div><div><br></div><div>On start times - we can’t open the doors to members of the public til 8:30 for a 9:00 start at the moment. However, we also cannot attempt to register a whole lot of people in 30 minutes on day 1, so the conference start time was pushed back to allow an hour to get people all registered. On day 2, the timing is the same because I know I’ll get mixed up if the session times change.</div><div><br></div><div>If we want 30 minute breaks, we need to take time from somewhere - about the only way I can see is to shorten stream sessions, I’ve added another sheet which shows 90 minute sessions and half hour breaks.</div><div><br></div><div>I don’t see yet how to get things finishing earlier… suggestions welcome, and we may yet get to open up earlier...</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div><br></div><div>Adam</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, 20 Apr 2019 at 05:12, John Bryant <<a href="mailto:johnwbryant@gmail.com" target="_blank">johnwbryant@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Thanks Adam & program committee, looking great!<br></div><div><br></div><div>The adjustment to having more talks is interesting, I suppose there may be a bit of a challenge to fill 60 speaking slots out of an audience of 170, but hey, challenges are good! And personally, I'm hopeful we exceed the 170 target, though it will raise some logistical challenges re: venue.</div><div><br></div><div>One of the key messages we got in attendee feedback last year was that timing was important, we could have done a bit better, and people found movement between sessions frustrating. There were also quite a few requests for longer talks, and more time between sessions. The venue layout this year might help improve the movement between sessions. But sticking with the 15+5 format, we'll need to be really strict on timing to improve on one of the key frustrations from last year's event.<br></div><div><br></div><div>On timing:</div><div>- Is a 930am start intentional? Feels a bit late to me, but I acknowledge that some people prefer a late start. But will people's attention start lagging for the talks late in the day, ie. finishing at 5:40 pm?<br></div><div>- Are 20 minute breaks between sessions long enough? For some people, these are important slots for networking. This is shorter than last year's 30 minute breaks.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div>John<br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 03:29, adam steer <<a href="mailto:adam.d.steer@gmail.com" target="_blank">adam.d.steer@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Hi all<div><br></div><div>We’d like to share with you our current thinking about the 2019 programme, and call for comments.</div><div><br></div><div>We need to put it all together and run calls for papers and workshops by the end of May - so please spark any debates early! We will close discussion and move toward a fixed plan at the end of April. Let's say 1 May is ‘close the discussion’ date.</div><div><br></div><div>As a rundown we have:</div><div><br></div><div>- 2 x 3.5 hour workshop sessions (8 rooms, 16 workshops possible in total)</div><div>- 60 15-20 minute stream talks (4 sessions, 3 streams, 5 talks each session)</div><div>- 4 keynotes</div><div>- a mystery hour on day 2, after the initial keynote. this might be a panel, a very short unconference, a ’state of [QGIS/OSM/… ]’ plenary talk session, or a facilitated community discussion on what we see as prevalent issues in the community. We’d like to know what you think, but also reserve the right to surprise (and we hope, delight) you</div><div>- a community day, which will be a mix of OSGeo code sprint, mapathons, and other OSGeo / OSM related activities.</div><div>- various opportunities for breakfasts and informal socialising, as well as an organised conference icebreaker and dinner.</div><div><br></div><div><div>These are laid out here: <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17KvFcVn226ay0clCZsBTL0jpbX-4ZMt6nyBfLcF94mE/edit?usp=sharing" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17KvFcVn226ay0clCZsBTL0jpbX-4ZMt6nyBfLcF94mE/edit?usp=sharing</a></div><div><br></div><div>There is a bit of variation from the 2018 formula. We’ve tried to add more session talks; and hope to find a good provocative keynote to end with (in fact we hope to find four excellent and thought provoking / challenging keynotes)</div><div><br></div><div>Please feel free to comment on the document, respond to the list, or myself, with ideas.<br></div></div><div><br></div><div>Regards</div><div><br></div><div>Adam</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail-m_2510091514726913781gmail-m_-7652638601249584539gmail-m_4958157053773847697gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div>Dr. Adam Steer</div><div><a href="http://spatialised.net" target="_blank">http://spatialised.net</a></div><div><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Steer" target="_blank">https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Steer</a><br><a href="http://au.linkedin.com/in/adamsteer" target="_blank">http://au.linkedin.com/in/adamsteer</a></div><div><a href="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0046-7236" target="_blank">http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0046-7236</a><br>+61 427 091 712 :: @adamdsteer</div><div><br></div><div>Suits are bad for business: <a href="http://www.spatialised.net/business-penguins/" target="_blank">http://www.spatialised.net/business-penguins/</a></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Oceania mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Oceania@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Oceania@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail-m_2510091514726913781gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div>Dr. Adam Steer</div><div><a href="http://spatialised.net" target="_blank">http://spatialised.net</a></div><div><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Steer" target="_blank">https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Steer</a><br><a href="http://au.linkedin.com/in/adamsteer" target="_blank">http://au.linkedin.com/in/adamsteer</a></div><div><a href="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0046-7236" target="_blank">http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0046-7236</a><br>+61 427 091 712 :: @adamdsteer</div><div><br></div><div>Suits are bad for business: <a href="http://www.spatialised.net/business-penguins/" target="_blank">http://www.spatialised.net/business-penguins/</a></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>