[PyCON-Organizers] FWD: PyCon Feedback and Volunteers (Re: Pycon disappointment)

[Steve Holden]

Aahz wrote:
> FYI
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from Aahz <aahz at pythoncraft.com> -----
> 
> From: Aahz <aahz at pythoncraft.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
> Subject: PyCon Feedback and Volunteers (Re: Pycon disappointment)
> Date: 16 Mar 2008 17:09:02 -0700
> Organization: The Cat & Dragon
> 
> [warning: rant ahead]
> 
> [[
> Before starting my rant, I would like to encourage anyone who was at
> PyCon but has not provided formal feedback to use the following URLs:
> 
> For the conference:
> http://tinyurl.com/2ara8u
> 
> For the tutorials:
> http://tinyurl.com/2ew2pc
> ]]
> 
> In article <5776428b-82b3-4921-945a-69beab134edd at b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
> fumanchu  <fumanchu at aminus.org> wrote:
>> This is my third PyCon, and I've found a reasonably-sized cadre of
>> people who come for the hallway conversations plus a Bof or two,
>> having given up on hearing anything new, useful, or inspiring in the
>> talks. There are several people I know who would like to see a more
>> advanced academic track.
> 
> Let's leave aside the issue of how sponsor talks were handled: assuming
> that there's general agreement that this year was a failed experiment,
> fixing it is easy.
> 
> What you're bringing up here is a much more difficult issue, and it is,
> in the end, not a solvable issue in the general case.  For starters,
> speaking as someone who has been going to science fiction conventions
> for more than twenty years, there will inevitably be plenty of people
> like your cadre.  I rarely go to organized programming anymore, but I
> still have a great time because I'm seeing all my friends.  PyCon is a
> similar community-oriented event.
> 
> Moreover, PyCon's success rests on many legs: tutorials, Open Space,
> Lightning Talks, formal presentations, keynotes, and sprinting.  That's
> aside from the myriad opportunities to network with people.
> 
> Finally, trying to satisfy a thousand people is impossible.  People who
> want to emphasize specific topics (e.g. an academic track) will need to
> start organizing other kinds of Python conferences.
> 
> 
> Now the rant:
> 
> If you did not like the programming this year (aside from the sponsor
> talks) and you did not participate in organizing PyCon or in delivering
> presentations, it is YOUR FAULT.  PERIOD.  EXCLAMATION POINT!
> 
> PyCon is built on the backs of its volunteers.  I personally spent more
> than twenty hours just doing Program Committee work.  We rejected half
> the proposals that we received, simply due to lack of space.  We had
> difficulty evaluating some proposals because nobody on the PC had subject
> matter expertise.
> 
> None of the speakers received any kind of honorarium.  Except for keynote
> speakers (e.g. Ivan Krstic), no speakers received free registration
> unless they requested financial aid.
> 
> There are no requirements for volunteering other than a willingness to
> volunteer and a modicum of courtesy in working with people.
> 
> PyCon is what YOU make of it.  If you want to change PyCon, propose a
> presentation or join the conference committee (concom) -- the latter only
> requires signing up for the pycon-organizers mailing list.
> 
> This doesn't mean that we are uninterested in feedback.  We love
> feedback.  But there are stark limits to what we can do unless people get
> involved and push their pet projects.

I am copying this reply to comp.lang.python just so that the people who 
were *not* involved in the organization of the conference will know two 
things: first, that the negative feedback the organizers have received 
is regarded as valuable, helpful, and (to some extent) justified; 
secondly, so that everyone who receives this message knows that they are 
welcome to participate in improving PyCon (which, as Aahz has indicated, 
really means that the broader the range of expertise on the program 
committee the more the selected talks can reflect the true needs of the 
audience - but don't imagine that participation is limited to the 
Program Committee). Also, please be aware this is only one message on a 
*very* long thread in the pycon-organizers list.

Before I say anything else, I want to (again) publicly thank David 
Goodger and his team, and the ChiPy team led by Chris McAvoy, for the 
long hours and hard work they put in to what I personally (as the 
founder of PyCon) regard as the best PyCon ever. You will perhaps get 
some idea of the explosive growth in demand they have managed to satisfy 
by pointing out that this year there were more people attending paid 
tutorials, and there are more people staying after the conference to 
sprint (thereby improving Python and its applications), and more people 
attending their *first* PyCon this year, than attended the first PyCon 
that I organized five years ago in DC.

If you have not been privy to the planning process, let me assure you 
that you have *no* idea how hard people have worked to try to ensure 
that *everyone* who came to PyCon this year had a positive experience. I 
can say this without fear of being thought to defend my own position, 
since I have (for the first time ever, yay!) played absolutely no formal 
role in the organization of PyCon. I can also say with every confidence 
that if you would like to volunteer to make the next PyCon (again in 
Chicago in 2009) better then you are unlikely to be turned away. The 
conference is growing so fast we have to run to keep up, everyone is 
learning as we go along.

Ken Whitesell has written (after admitting that his original assessment 
might have been hasty) """By rough count, I attended 22 separate talks, 
including the tutorials and plenary sessions. Of that, there were 4 (not 
5 that I wrote below) that I would consider below par.""" If the Program 
Committee have managed to provide a program where 75% of the talks were 
at or above average then they have worked a statistical miracle, though 
personally I have always felt that the general quality of PyCon talks 
has been way above that provided  by the average "pay to play" technical 
conference.

This does bring up another useful issue, which is that the overall 
delegate satisfaction is always going to be a bell-shaped curve. As the 
total number of delegates continues to rise the tails of that curve 
broaden, and it is more likely that a few delegates will be unhappy with 
the majority of the scheduled talks that they attend. It's unfortunate, 
but all the organizers can do is keep the focus on quality and continue 
to encourage broad participation. It is likely that almost everyone who 
reads this message has a legitimate right to consider themselves a part 
of the Python community.

To address the specific issue of sponsor presentations, I believe that 
the Diamond Sponsor Keynotes given by both White Oak Technologies and 
Google were entirely within the spirit of PyCon, and appropriate to the 
audience even though not highly technical. As far as the sponsor 
lightning talks go, all involved admit that mistakes were made. The 
specific issue that had the largest negative impact was the bunching of 
the talks at the beginning of the session on Friday and (particularly) 
on Saturday. This was effectively an attempt to repeat the successful 
2007 formula without acknowledging the effects of the (huge!) increase 
in sponsorship this year.

While there are steps that could be taken to remedy this issue, I 
believe (though David Goodger can choose to contradict me, since he is 
the authority and I have not yet discussed this with him) that the 
success of the exhibition hall this year means that the sponsors are 
unlikely to need a specific channel in the conference program to present 
their commercial message. If they have a technical talk they feel would 
interest the delegates then they can use the same sign-up sheet that 
everyone else does, and be subject to the same rules as everyone else.

To put the sponsorship in complete perspective, subtracting the catering 
costs of (I think) $182 a delegate paying $200 (the hobbyist early-bird 
registration fee) for a place at PyCon 2008 was contributing $18 to the 
remaining costs, which were not insignificant. A number of delegates 
with whom I have discussed this issue have agreed with me that for that 
kind of subsidy it isn't unreasonable to expect us to "rent our 
eyeballs" for a brief period, though next year I am sure the organizers 
will be sure to brief all sponsor keynote speakers carefully about 
acceptable topics.

In summary, when things are growing as fact as PyCon is a few mis-steps 
are inevitable, as we are traversing foreign territory and learning as 
we go. While it's upsetting to know that some individual delegates were 
less than happy with their conference experience I believe the feedback 
will tell a different overall story when it has been analyzed.

The organizers continue to be open to offers of assistance, and feedback 
from any participant. That is the spirit of PyCon, and I'd like to thank 
Bruce Eckel for saying what was on his mind. As a provider of commercial 
training I am uncomfortably aware that one normally hears from one 
customer out of each seven who are dissatisfied. If the other six will 
contact me personally I will do what I can to remedy the situation :-)

Again, the URLs for delegates to provide feedback about their 
experiences are

 > For the conference:
 > http://tinyurl.com/2ara8u
 >
 > For the tutorials:
 > http://tinyurl.com/2ew2pc

I hope to see you all at PyCon next year. Way to go, Chicago!!

regards
  Steve
-- 
Steve Holden        +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC              http://www.holdenweb.com/