2 ms·
> there are people who you know based on overwhelming experience will give great talks that attendees will appreciate and learn from ... do you really want to r
by xdavidliu 4y ago
> there are people who you know based on overwhelming experience will give great talks that attendees will appreciate and learn from ... do you really want to reject them?
If I'm reading correctly, you're saying that sometimes a work deserves to get in based (at least partly) on the author's name recognition (for historically having given good talks) and not solely on the merits of the work itself. I see the point you're trying to make, but something about this argument makes me uncomfortable.
- ghaff 4y agoAn abstract isn't a talk. It's a limited description of a topic (which is often written pretty quickly by experienced presenters). So, yes, someone who consistently delivers is probably going to do a pretty good job unless the abstract just seems uninteresting. i.e. a good presenter can pick a topic I just don't think attendees would be interested in or, more commonly, just isn't a good fit for the program. More broadly, yes, you need to balance having people you know will do a solid job whatever their abstract against welcoming new speakers. Imagine a resume is just so-so. But you've worked with a person and know they're great. Do you judge them based on their resume?