2008/11/8 Dave Neary <<a href="mailto:dneary@free.fr">dneary@free.fr</a>> <div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Hi, <div class="Ih2E3d"> Dave Crossland wrote: > I'd generally agree with this, but I think LGM has been consistent at > packing out 3+-1 days with quality presentations the last few years. > > I think JP's suggestion about more focus is worth thinking about, > though; perhaps we could have 4 days but only one track, so that we > don't have to make hard choices between what to see? :-) </div>FWIW, I think that some of the best things about the first LGM were:  - One track, with mostly invited speakers (no call for participation)  - 3 days, with 2 days scheduled presentations, 1 day completely "unconference".  - 2 hour lunch break  - 9am start, 5pm finish  - Lots of space in the schedule to absorb conference over-runs, and allow chat time between conferences (some people said too much - 40 minute presentations were scheduled at the top of each hour). I don't think that most people are there for the presentations, so I don't think "packing out" the schedule is important. It's important in conferences where attendees pay a lot of money to go, and need to justify the expense to their bosses by pointing out all the great content that's scheduled. We're not in that situation.  </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Those 4 or 5 points were core principles when I was organising with David Odin. I missed both Montreal 1 and Wrocklaw, so I don't know how much they carried through; but if they didn't I'd suggest reverting back and avoiding once again the temptation to cede to pressure from people who want to put their thumbprint in the ice. I had people tell me they wouldn't travel if they didn't have a presentation, I offered a ligtning talk. I had people say they couldn't justify travelling for an unscheduled day, I told them maybe the conference wasn't for them. I had people insist that hearing a 40 minute presentation on their project would be great, vital, a huge boost to the project - sorry, but the chances are that most people won't be captivated for 40 minutes by a presentation of (say) Art of Illusion in the same way they would be by a presentation on design principles, on free content & remix, or on Inkscape. So to the organisers: Decide what content you want, set the tone, don't let the weeds grow and end up with a hairy 2 or 3 track schedule with presentations titled "MyGraphicsProject.org: Cool stuff we have done this year". Make sure all the presentations are useful to most attendees, and all the presenters are good.</blockquote><div> Sounds like a very good wrap-up! :)   In Wrocław we tried 4 days for the first time and I think it was a good idea, provided all the new blood we had. This is the reason why I suggested to keep that a 4-day event. Do we want this back to 3 days? I would suggest we concentrate on one-track, 4-days and lots of room for meetings and discussions within each team and among teams. That is a slight shrinkage of the schedule we had in Wrocław but nothing dramatic. Let's avoid dilemmas! While I agree with a one-track conference/talks set-up, we have to remember that in Montreal, mostly on day 1 in 2007, we had 2 and even 3 tracks, most of those being tutorials or presentation of the software to newcomers (and yes, some presentations of new projects to LGM). The reason for this was that we — and I think this was also one of the main goal for the first LGM in Lyon — wanted to gather designers, not always aware (to say the least) of what's going on outside the mainstream when it comes to their working tools... I think we want these people in Montreal again next year, do we? BUT, we could also find other ways than formal presentations to show people the LGM projects. So, let's say for now we have a one-track conf. We always try to make things better. I do understand we need more room for meetings and open discussions. This is critical. It's a clear need and I will address this the best possible way. So, with Dave, I agree we don't have to pack the conference. That was a criticism of the LGM in Montreal, where we probably went too far in that direction. I will make sure we don't repeat that! 30-minute presentation + question period seems fine. And again agree, some presentations can be a bit longer... and some presenters — or is it their subject?! — have a way of electrising people and create a climate where the discussion goes on and on! So, yes, room for that too. I slightly disagree with no call for presentations because then how do we get fresh blood in? But I do agree that we can all activate our networks and find some good projects and invite those people. But we have to have a mean of letting fresh blood in the LGM. I think it's one of the goals too, right? We have a logistic issue with food on the Sunday, this is why I suggest Wednesday-Saturday. Also, many (most) people took the plane back home on Sunday... But I understand some people will find this a bit tight on working days. Thanks to all for the input so far. Let's continue. It's very interesting! Cheers, Louis </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary <a href="mailto:dneary@free.fr">dneary@free.fr</a> Tel: +33 9 51 13 46 45 Cell: +33 6 77 01 92 13 <div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">_______________________________________________ CREATE mailing list <a href="mailto:CREATE@lists.freedesktop.org">CREATE@lists.freedesktop.org</a> <a href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create" target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create</a> </div></div></blockquote></div> -- Louis Desjardins Organiser LGM 2009 - Montréal