Re: PyCon Feedback and Volunteers ( Pycon disappointment)
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Torsten Bronger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Aahz writes: >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >> Torsten Bronger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> I see no reason why the "fault" for parts of the rest being >>> sub-optimal, too, must necessarily be on the attendee's side. (Just >>> hypothetically; I wasn't at PyCon.) >> >> Let's suppose you have a group of friends who collectively throw a >> party. They invite you to help out organizing it and putting it >> together, but you choose not to. If you don't have a good time at >> the party because it wasn't what you wanted, I think it's fair to say >> it was your fault. And I think exactly the same thing is true for >> PyCon, albeit on a much larger scale. > >Fair enough. But then I question the sensibility in saying "it is XY's >fault" at all. > >Somebody not involved in organising was not happy with the Con. You >may take the criticism or leave it. The criticism may be justified or >not. But saying that it is "his fault" is useless in my opinion, it >even discourages feedback. It think it's okay to evaluate something >that you didn't help coming into existence. A good point is a good >point no matter who makes it. Two things: * There's a reason why I labelled it a "rant" ;-) * You may be misunderstanding the distinction between "fault" and "blame". When there is fault, it is a person's responsibility to correct it. Blame, OTOH, is about responsibility that *should* have been taken. We're not telling people that they should volunteer to run PyCon (although the vast majority of people who help run events like this end up enjoying them more than people who just show up). But anyone who complains and doesn't volunteer is at fault -- the only recourse likely to produce results is to change their volunteer status. As I said, feedback is welcome. Those of us who volunteer do so because we care about the Python community and want to put on a successful event for everyone. But we can rarely make commitments to change anything unless people step up to fix them. It's really no different from the people who show up here on c.l.py to complain about Python: the answer inevitably boils down to "write a patch!" -- Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "It is easier to optimize correct code than to correct optimized code." --Bill Harlan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: PyCon Feedback and Volunteers ( Pycon disappointment)
On Mar 17, 8:16 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Torsten Bronger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >Carl Banks writes: > >> On Mar 16, 10:49 pm, Brian Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> On Mar 16, 8:09 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) wrote: > > If you did not like the programming this year (aside from the > sponsor talks) and you did not participate in organizing PyCon > or in delivering presentations, it is YOUR FAULT. PERIOD. > EXCLAMATION POINT! > > >>> I find this insulting, inexcusable, and utter nonsense. If > >>> putting the blame for a failed experiment on the backs of the > >>> good folks who paid good money for travel, lodging, and > >>> registration is also an experiment, you can hereby consider it > >>> also failed. > > >> He said "aside from the sponsor talks", chief. > > >I see no reason why the "fault" for parts of the rest being > >sub-optimal, too, must necessarily be on the attendee's side. (Just > >hypothetically; I wasn't at PyCon.) > > Let's suppose you have a group of friends who collectively throw a party. > They invite you to help out organizing it and putting it together, but > you choose not to. If you don't have a good time at the party because it > wasn't what you wanted, I think it's fair to say it was your fault. And > I think exactly the same thing is true for PyCon, albeit on a much larger > scale. > > It is absolutely critical to the long-term success of PyCon as a > volunteer-run community conference that each attendee take responsibility > for their experience. Science fiction fandom -- the part that holds > volunteer-run events such as Worldcon -- has lots of experience with this > model. It is one reason why such cons make a fuss about attendees being > "members", compared to "purchasing a ticket" (which is what you do for a > commercialized Star Trek con). > -- > Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*>http://www.pythoncraft.com/ > > "It is easier to optimize correct code than to correct optimized code." > --Bill Harlan You have a lot of good points, Aahz. I was thinking of the talks and such as a kind of seminar learning event, not a participatory community event. I went for two reasons: 1) To learn more Plone / Zope 2) To hang out with Python geeks The first one I didn't really get anywhere with, but I got lots of time with PyCon attendees, which was cool. I hope I can go next year, make new friends and maybe present some of my own stuff. Mike -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: PyCon Feedback and Volunteers ( Pycon disappointment)
Hallöchen! Aahz writes: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Torsten Bronger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> [...] >> >> I see no reason why the "fault" for parts of the rest being >> sub-optimal, too, must necessarily be on the attendee's side. >> (Just hypothetically; I wasn't at PyCon.) > > Let's suppose you have a group of friends who collectively throw a > party. They invite you to help out organizing it and putting it > together, but you choose not to. If you don't have a good time at > the party because it wasn't what you wanted, I think it's fair to > say it was your fault. And I think exactly the same thing is true > for PyCon, albeit on a much larger scale. Fair enough. But then I question the sensibility in saying "it is XY's fault" at all. Somebody not involved in organising was not happy with the Con. You may take the criticism or leave it. The criticism may be justified or not. But saying that it is "his fault" is useless in my opinion, it even discourages feedback. It think it's okay to evaluate something that you didn't help coming into existence. A good point is a good point no matter who makes it. Tschö, Torsten. -- Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (See http://ime.webhop.org for further contact info.) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: PyCon Feedback and Volunteers ( Pycon disappointment)
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Torsten Bronger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Carl Banks writes: >> On Mar 16, 10:49 pm, Brian Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Mar 16, 8:09 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) wrote: If you did not like the programming this year (aside from the sponsor talks) and you did not participate in organizing PyCon or in delivering presentations, it is YOUR FAULT. PERIOD. EXCLAMATION POINT! >>> >>> I find this insulting, inexcusable, and utter nonsense. If >>> putting the blame for a failed experiment on the backs of the >>> good folks who paid good money for travel, lodging, and >>> registration is also an experiment, you can hereby consider it >>> also failed. >> >> He said "aside from the sponsor talks", chief. > >I see no reason why the "fault" for parts of the rest being >sub-optimal, too, must necessarily be on the attendee's side. (Just >hypothetically; I wasn't at PyCon.) Let's suppose you have a group of friends who collectively throw a party. They invite you to help out organizing it and putting it together, but you choose not to. If you don't have a good time at the party because it wasn't what you wanted, I think it's fair to say it was your fault. And I think exactly the same thing is true for PyCon, albeit on a much larger scale. It is absolutely critical to the long-term success of PyCon as a volunteer-run community conference that each attendee take responsibility for their experience. Science fiction fandom -- the part that holds volunteer-run events such as Worldcon -- has lots of experience with this model. It is one reason why such cons make a fuss about attendees being "members", compared to "purchasing a ticket" (which is what you do for a commercialized Star Trek con). -- Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "It is easier to optimize correct code than to correct optimized code." --Bill Harlan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: PyCon Feedback and Volunteers ( Pycon disappointment)
Hallöchen! Carl Banks writes: > On Mar 16, 10:49 pm, Brian Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Mar 16, 8:09 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) wrote: >> >>> If you did not like the programming this year (aside from the >>> sponsor talks) and you did not participate in organizing PyCon >>> or in delivering presentations, it is YOUR FAULT. PERIOD. >>> EXCLAMATION POINT! >> >> I find this insulting, inexcusable, and utter nonsense. If >> putting the blame for a failed experiment on the backs of the >> good folks who paid good money for travel, lodging, and >> registration is also an experiment, you can hereby consider it >> also failed. > > He said "aside from the sponsor talks", chief. I see no reason why the "fault" for parts of the rest being sub-optimal, too, must necessarily be on the attendee's side. (Just hypothetically; I wasn't at PyCon.) Tschö, Torsten. -- Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (See http://ime.webhop.org for further contact info.) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
