[Inpycon] Collated feedback

[Noufal Ibrahim]

Good idea. Who has the feedback sheets?

kracekumar <me at kracekumar.com> writes:

> It would be good if we send the feedback of the respective sessions to
> the speaker, saying "Topic: total +1, -1, -0 represented as charts"
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>       First, congrats to the organisers of Pycon India, for pulling it
>> off, given that we had a late start this year, with the venue shifting
>> to Bangalore and all that. And we had really nice key note speakers.
>> Both the presentations were good.
>>
>>       Thanks to Noufal for this mail. It is a nice summary of the over
>> all mood. I would like to add a few of my suggestions.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Noufal Ibrahim <noufal at nibrahim.net.in> wrote:
>>>
>>> - OTOH, maybe it is sensible to avoid tutorials all together. 3 days is
>>>    harrowing for everybody and the separate registrations and stuff makes
>>>    it quite hard.
>>>
>>           I would like to have tutorials(though I couldn't attend them
>> this year due to unavoidable reasons). This where people new to python
>> pick things up. But, here is what I would suggest. We should do the
>> CfP by around April, and announce the selected proposals by around
>> mid-July. We can use the  intervening time to do rigorous rounds of
>> selection - including asking the presenter to show a non-trivial
>> working example of his talk(and it should not be picked from the
>> tool's tutorial page). This is just a suggestion
>>
>>
>>
>>> 5. Poor talk quality - This was by far the biggest complaint. Following
>>>     are some suggestions.
>>>
>>        This was felt by a lot of people. We felt that some of the
>> presenters were actually disinterested. May be their organisation
>> asked them to give a talk ? Again, talks should not be blind
>> theoretical data, picked from various web sites. These are a few
>> things that we should take into account.
>>
>>         Probably, we need to ask people to upload their complete
>> material, including slides and code, and with more volunteers review
>> the content, at least a month before the event. I agree that we need a
>> lot more man power for this. But we will do our best.
>>
>>> - One hour is too long for a talk and gives people time to ramble. 30
>>>    minutes of talk plus 10 or 15 minutes of questions. If it takes more
>>>    than that, it's covering too much.
>>>
>>          May be like the US pycon, we can have longer sessions, in
>> which lengthy discussions can be organised. For eg., someone
>> explaining the ZTK may not be able to cover up a lot of things in a
>> diligent way within 1 hour.
>>
>>> - CFP and selection done *much* earlier with a larger review
>>>    committee. Perhaps with multiple meetings of members (over IRC). We'll
>>>    have to take into consideration the bio of the presenter and get a
>>>    little brutal with selection.
>>>
>>      Yes :) About April beginning, and close it by first week of May.
>> After selecting the proposals, allow uploads of presentation material
>> till middle of June. And do further checks on that ? Will that be
>> possible if we have an expert panel of volunteers ?
>>
>>> 6. Too tight a schedule - No sufficient gap between talk slots.
>>>
>>> - We should keep 5 (or even 10) minutes of "free time" between slots and
>>>    mercilessly enforce this.
>>>
>>       Yes, by the time we move out of a hall and get into the next, the
>> speaker has already finished the intent and purpose of the talk.
>>
>> Thanks again to the organisers for making it a good event. We will do
>> our best to improve the event further :)
>>

-- 
Cordially,
Noufal
http://nibrahim.net.in