[Scipy-organizers] Reviewer Stickers on Badges / Honors In Program?

[Anthony Scopatz]

On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Matthew McCormick (thewtex) <
matt at mmmccormick.com> wrote:

> /spidrin
>
> Yes, I personally love stickers :-).
>
> Is there an appropriate SciPy US Conference logo that we could use? We
> could stamp "Reviewer", etc on the logo for the design.  That would be
> sufficient for the logo design, unless there is someone with a design to
> create a per-role design.  What was used on the spectacular moderator lab
> coats last year?
>

So the design we used was just the one on the website:
http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/_static/scipyshiny_small.png  However, it
was cropped and reshaded at the printer.  This doesn't help us a lot here...


> I can setup the virtual badges.
>

Awesome!


>
> /spidrout
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Anthony Scopatz <scopatz at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> spidr,
>>
>> I like the idea of virtual badges in support of physical ones.  I am
>> anti-stuff, personally, but I think it would be awesome to see people
>> walking around the conference with collections of the various ways that
>> they participated.  It would be a conversation starter.  Hopefully in the
>> same way that the laptop stickers that James mentioned would be throughout
>> the year.
>>
>> /scopzout
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Matthew McCormick (thewtex) <
>> matt at mmmccormick.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Another badge to consider delivering: the Mozilla Open Badge,
>>>
>>>   http://openbadges.org/
>>>
>>> This is a formal, permanent way to recognize volunteer's contributions.
>>> They provide encouragement, something to display on a LinkedIn profile,
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 6:38 PM, James Bergstra <james.bergstra at gmail.com
>>> >wrote:
>>>
>>> > Great ideas guys, I would work for an "I reviewed for SciPy 2013"
>>> laptop
>>> > sticker.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Jonathan Rocher <jrocher at enthought.com
>>> > >wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Katy,
>>> > >
>>> > > I love your mathematical computation of how much is a bajillion at
>>> the
>>> > end
>>> > > :D.
>>> > >
>>> > > I love these ideas. Last year, we had lots of things to raffle and
>>> almost
>>> > > not enough people/good opportunities/time to do these raffles. We
>>> could
>>> > > also imagine a $50 discount on their registration, or a special
>>> tee-shirt
>>> > > "SciPy Reviewer", or "Python Expert". But I like your ideas.
>>> > >
>>> > > Jonathan
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Katy Huff <katyhuff at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > Hi Ya'll.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > We're going to need a bajillion* reviewers for the abstracts and
>>> > papers.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > That worried me. BUT Anthony had a brilliant idea! He suggested we
>>> > could
>>> > > > get lots of extra reviews per reviewer if there was some incentive
>>> to
>>> > > > review more than 10 papers each. In particular he suggested we
>>> could
>>> > > offer
>>> > > > stickers on badges and an honorary note in the program for
>>> reviewers at
>>> > > > various "levels."
>>> > > >
>>> > > > That way, when we invite people to become reviewers, they would be
>>> told
>>> > > > that they would be honored as "bronze level" for 10 reviews,
>>> "silver
>>> > > level"
>>> > > > for 20 reviews, and "gold level" for 30 reviews. ( or something
>>> like
>>> > > that )
>>> > > > Hopefully, this would encourage them to do more than 10 reviews.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Serge also suggested that we could add incentive by raffling
>>> something
>>> > > > among the "gold" level folks as well. I think that would be great.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > So - Does anyone not love these ideas? Does anyone have a better
>>> one?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Can we get such stickers on the badges? (Probably this question is
>>> > mostly
>>> > > > directed at Andy & Kelsey & Leah). Are there things we could
>>> raffle?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks!
>>> > > > Katy
>>> > > > (your friendly program co-chair)
>>> > > >
>>> > > > * If we just think about the abstracts and assume 70% conference
>>> growth
>>> > > > (i.e. 600 attendees), I think we need to be prepared for 200
>>> abstracts
>>> > to
>>> > > > be submitted, which means we need about 75 reviewers. That's
>>> > > approximately
>>> > > > a bajillion.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > --
>>> > > > http://katyhuff.github.com
>>> > > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > > Scipy-organizers mailing list
>>> > > > Scipy-organizers at scipy.org
>>> > > > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-organizers
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > --
>>> > > Jonathan Rocher, PhD
>>> > > Scientific software developer
>>> > > Enthought, Inc.
>>> > > jrocher at enthought.com
>>> > > 1-512-536-1057
>>> > > http://www.enthought.com
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > Scipy-organizers mailing list
>>> > > Scipy-organizers at scipy.org
>>> > > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-organizers
>>> > >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Scipy-organizers mailing list
>>> > Scipy-organizers at scipy.org
>>> > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-organizers
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Scipy-organizers mailing list
>>> Scipy-organizers at scipy.org
>>> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-organizers
>>>
>>
>>
>