Main Page

From Health of Conferences Committee

Revision as of 19:28, 20 February 2006 MarkDHill (Talk | contribs) Question Results ← Previous diff		Revision as of 19:30, 20 February 2006 MarkDHill (Talk | contribs) Next diff →
Line 3:		Line 3:
	===Introduction===		===Introduction===
		+
		+
		+	----
	===Top 10 best conference ideas===		===Top 10 best conference ideas===
Line 26:		Line 29:
	'''10.'''		'''10.'''
		+
		+	----
	===Question Results===		===Question Results===
Line 111:		Line 116:
	Please see [http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_i18n documentation on customizing the interface] + [[Health of Conferences Committee]]		Please see [http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_i18n documentation on customizing the interface] + [[Health of Conferences Committee]]
	- and the [http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_User%27s_Guide User's Guide] for usage and configuration help.		- and the [http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_User%27s_Guide User's Guide] for usage and configuration help.
		+
		+	----
		+
		+	----

---

Revision as of 19:30, 20 February 2006

Contents 1 Health of Conferences Committee Survey Results 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Top 10 best conference ideas 1.3 Question Results

Health of Conferences Committee Survey Results

Introduction

---

Top 10 best conference ideas

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

---

Question Results

Question 1: REVIEWER LOAD. Has your community recently adopted new practices to deal with growing reviewer load, such as:

• tracking reviews of rejected papers from conference to conference as is done in journal reviewing
• increasing program committee size
• charging a review fee
• others?

For each practice you are using, what is your view of how well it is working within your community? Please comment on the merit of the other strategies as applies to your community.

Large Conferences

Medium Conferences

Small Conferences

Question 2: NON-INCREMENTAL Has your community recently adopted new practices to promote non-incremental new ideas?

• big ideas sessions
• more papers
• shorter papers
• deemphasizing detailed evaluation
• others?

For each practice you are using, what is your view of how well it is working within your community? Please comment on the merit of the other strategies as applies to your community.

Large Conferences

Medium Conferences

Small Conferences

Question 3: PROGRAM COMMITTEES Does your community practice:

• double blind submissions
• program committee submission restrictions
• rebuttals (author responses)
• large program committees
• program subcommittees
• others?

Do these practices seem to help or hurt promoting your field?

Large Conferences

Medium Conferences

Small Conferences

Question 4: WORKSHOPS, ETC. Does your community provide venue for work not mature enough for your major conferences, such as:

• workshop co-located at conferences
• stand-alone workshops
• panels
• crazy idea sessions

On balance, are these other venues effect for advancing your field? What mechanisms, if any, do you use allow good papers from these venues to later achieve wider dissemination?

Large Conferences

Medium Conferences

Small Conferences

Question 5: CATCH-ALL. Are there other approaches your community has tried or abandoned that the rest of us can learn from?

Large Conferences

Medium Conferences

Small Conferences

Please see documentation on customizing the interface + Health of Conferences Committee - and the User's Guide for usage and configuration help.

---

---