I worry about having an excessively open-ended survey.
I think it's worth the time to try to come up with a list of questions
which people would be likely to want to answer and that also give some
useful information.
So perhaps some categories might be considered, and perhaps it should be
said that one can choose to respond to any or all they might select:
(after shown a list of the talks as a reminder)...
which talks stand out as the most interesting to you? Why?
Which speakers gave talks which were entertaining/informative/mentally
stimulating? Add details as you like.
What have you learned at LGM 2012 that you did not know about or
understand before you attended?
Was the number of talks too many? not enough?
Was there anything you were hoping to be presented that didn't happen?
Did you have productive meetings outside of the scheduled talks? How
were they productive?
Did you attend any workshops that were interesting/helpful/useful?
Do you feel that the attendance (numbers and the particular individuals)
made for a good audience and discussions?
It's also useful for those responding to identify themselves as to
developer, user, professional user, enthusiast, etc. (I suppose some
could be all of these)
I only mean this as an initial framework to add to, subtract from, or
refine as others see fit.
Greg
_______________________________________________
CREATE mailing list
CREATE@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
