Midwest Dev Chat

MidwestDevChat.com

  • The newest 15 messages in the super-cool #communityorganizing channel.

  • 09/07 12:25:24 Lura: If I knew a damn thing about grant writing, I might try to do that myself for the tech community.
  • 09/07 12:25:33 Lura: lord knows I’d blend in. neutral_face
  • 09/07 14:16:05 Pilar: @Lura this book sounds like a good companion to a very powerful book I read last year called _Waking up White_
  • 09/07 14:16:07 Pilar: https://www.amazon.com/Waking-Up-White-Finding-...
  • 09/12 12:20:36 Rochel: > And these two things are sort of at odds with one another. These affluent white parents are in a position where they can set up their kids’ lives so that they’re better than other kids’ lives. So the dark side is that, ultimately, people are thinking about their own kids, and that can come at the expense of other people’s kids.
  • 09/12 12:20:43 Rochel: This point_up
  • 09/12 12:21:51 Rochel: I get class and race guilt from this alone
  • 09/13 20:46:15 Halley: For those of you who have ran events with CFPs, any chance you'd be open to sharing what tool(s) you used for managing the CFP process and your thoughts on them?
  • 09/13 20:52:27 Lura: @Orval ^
  • 09/13 21:17:54 Orval: ohai! we have used http://Papercall.io you would need Ruby to be installed.
  • 09/13 21:26:25 Orval: This year we tried Sessionize because others had been using it. I am sad to say I cannot recommend this unless you only have one person reviewing all the talks. The round robin thing for comparison of a few talks at a time, sucks. The output of the rank-order of all the people's talks turned out to be vaguely similar to random. When we did later actions with the submissions our work on review went from being 80 to 100% down to 0% so the work that we did was lost. We had a number of sharp people working with this tool, and it could have been user error on our part, however if it was then it was because the tool was not intuitive and poorly documented. I would advise against using this tool or paying for it.
  • 09/13 21:27:10 Orval: The cost for each of these two options was roughly the same at about $500 per event when we evaluated them.
  • 09/13 21:30:49 Orval: These are the only two that we have actually used. The full list from our 2017 research. Possible options: * http://papercall.io free (only 5 reviewers) * http://papercall.io Paid ($499) * Google forms * http://www.submittable.com * http://www.paperleap.com/pages/en/features-and-... (usually used for academic papers $/€ 25 / CfP for analytics) * Open Source system: https://pkp.sfu.ca/ocs/ * Easy Chair http://easychair.org/licenses.cgi
  • 09/14 09:20:00 Halley: Thank you so much! This adds a few more to my list to look into. I was currently down to the free papercall version and a couple of open source options (frab and pretalx). Not sure if we can reasonably pay $500 for a CFP solution for a first-time event -- nor if we really need to at this point. This is SO helpful. I really appreciate it!
  • 09/14 15:13:57 Orval: We used the free Papercall option, and I am a fan of that. Good luck, and I hope you have an excellent event!
  • *Usernames have been changed to protect the innocent.
We're currently 1103 members strong. Join us!
Request Invite

Check out all the cool channels!

Join the conversation!