Dreamsongs Wiki


TechnicalProgram

What changes can we make to the technical program (papers, panels, etc)? -rpg

Would you like to see a ListOfPotentialTopics ? -- Peter Sommerlad


Or changes to the way they're presented or where they are presented or adding new stuff (like short plays, dramatic readings, sing-alongs). -rpg


I think this subject is too broad, because it links too many things together.

If panels are broken, chances are they are broken in different ways to the paper programme, and different ways to the tutorials. Hmm

WhatsNotBroken?


JamesNoble

Please stop having the majority of papers just be extensions of things redone in Java or through using Aspects. I have nothing against these but there are conferences for these and the technical program seems lacking because of the rehash of these ideass.

-- JosephYoder

Maybe there is an interesting "meta" topic that is important, though strictly speaking not technical: The importance of good communication and good writing. I can recall a few "must-read" papers that were way too much work to read. Is there a place for this in the program? Perhaps a session on PoorlyWrittenButUsefulPapers?

-- SteveBerczuk


The things I remember from the TechnicalProgram over the years were the inspiring invited talks. GuySteele, AlanKay, PaulMacCready, ChristopherAlexander, to name a few that I found interesting enough to purchase the videos of. I wasn't there last year and won't be there this year. I'd like to see some out of the box thinking to challenge folks a bit more. The guys working on Croquet (DavidSmith, AlanKay, et al) might be some good folks to bring in. However, I think bringing in innovators from other fields to challenge people to innovate more would be great.

But, I'd like more than just an InvitedTalk from these guys. I want to see ways to interact with them in smaller groups. Challenging hands-on events. Perhaps get the Simulations & Games people involved.

-- KenAuer


One of my favourite Oopsla moments was after Paul Macready's

keynote in Vancouver. Later that day he turned up in a workshop

I was in. I'm still not sure why, but he made some great

contributions to the discussion.

But when I think of the Technical Program, I normally think of the refereed programme. One difficulty I have is that I don't see why it has to be so exclusive, and so small. It seems like false scarcity to me. Papers are rejected because of some idea of Oopsla being the ultimate something, but the result comes out weird. Why can't we just accept more stuff? Well, I know why: academics who win in the scarcity game use the scarcity as evidence of prestige. If only 10% of papers are accepted, the conference must be really good. Much better than a conference

that accepts 20%. Twice as good. It all seems

fairly lame, don't you think?

RobertBiddle


Get the Simulation and Games people involved? As in computer games or as in NASAGA...? Proposed a couple of times that we organize an Open Space or Future Search event. Not easy to organize logistics, but I am sure we can get enough facilitators together to make it happen. MartineDevos