Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Your Excellent Conference Talk Was Rejected

promptworks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 125 posts

Re: Why Your Excellent Conference Talk Was Rejected

#41

Post by brightball »

Just to reinforce the last point regarding blogging and presenting locally, they are 100% correct. I've never actually submitted a talk for a conference but I've been speaking to local programming groups fairly regularly as well as blogging for the last 3-4 years. Regularly is a couple of times per year or slightly more often.

I don't get paid to do any of it, I just really enjoy talking about this stuff. Through these talks and blogging I've been recruited by 3 different companies to contribute to their company tech blogs and I was invited to speak at a rather large and exclusive conference where I was the only speaker not from a HUGE company on the docket.

It happened because I was giving the talk locally, somebody affiliated with the conference drove in from about an hour away to hear it and then stuck around to invite me to speak. I never considered that conferences would recruit but apparently they do.

Re: Why Your Excellent Conference Talk Was Rejected

#42

Post by bcantrill »

Like many here, I totally and vehemently disagree with the fourth reason for rejection (the "n00b"): if someone has a proposal that is worthy of presentation, they should be given the opportunity to present -- regardless of their age or experience. There are many reasons for this, including the most obvious one that if every conference insists on experience, no one will be able to get that experience. But the reasons for not depending on prior presentations run much deeper: if you are going to evaluate a proposal based on the speaker's prior presentations, you are tautologically unblinded in your review process. Having an unblinded review process is a grievous mistake: when conferences aren't blind in their reviews, they end up confirming their own biases more than selecting the best possible work. (I have always felt this way, but my feelings on this were galvanized by my own experiences inside the sausage factory[1] -- and for the conference that I am currently organizing[2], we are emphatically double blind.)

I understand the problem of creating engaging presentations as well as compelling content, but there are ways to achieve this other than being prejudicial. For example, if you want to create an invited talk or two for those whose presentations the program committee particularly likes, great. And if you want to provide presentation coaching for those who you accept who haven't presented before, even better. (I have provided this coaching informally in the past, and have found that a little coaching can go a long way.) But a blinded review process must be viewed as a constraint on the problem: to do any less is to deprive ourselves of the new ideas and presenters that provide us our collective vitality!

[1] https://www.usenix.org/conference/atc16/technical-sessions/p...

[2] http://systemswe.love/

Re: Why Your Excellent Conference Talk Was Rejected

#43

Post by pendext »

To add a personal anecdote, I was accepted to speak at a large regional conference as my first speaking gig. I explicitly stated I did not have any previous conference experience. I attribute this partially to having a relatively niche topic.

I was lucky enough to give the talk twice at a local user group prior to the conference, which helped with the actual conference talk, I am sure.

Re: Why Your Excellent Conference Talk Was Rejected

#44

Post by jazzyk »

There is a big elephant in the room here:

Most conferences have been converted to strictly money-making entities.

Here is how it works:

- a RFP is published

- you submit

- you get a response: "Unfortunately, your proposal did not get accepted, however, we have a limited number of time slots for sponsors. If you become a silver sponsor..." In other words, you can submit any crap, as long as you provide "sponsorship".

This may or may not apply to DevOps Days, I don't know enough about it. Also, the above does not invalidate some good points made by the author regarding selecting the right angle of the presentation, etc.

Re: Why Your Excellent Conference Talk Was Rejected

#45

Post by chrisseaton »

jazzyk wrote: post #44

There is a big elephant in the room here: Most conferences have been converted to strictly money-making entities. Here is how it works: - a RFP is published - you submit - you get a response: "Unfortunately, your proposal did not get accepted, however, we have a limited number of time slots for sponsors. If you become a silver sponsor..." In other words, you can submit any crap, as long as you provide "sponsorship".…

I've never seen that. Has anyone else?

I've had talks rejected from places even where we were sponsoring.

Re: Why Your Excellent Conference Talk Was Rejected

#46

Post by suyash »

jazzyk wrote: post #44

There is a big elephant in the room here: Most conferences have been converted to strictly money-making entities. Here is how it works: - a RFP is published - you submit - you get a response: "Unfortunately, your proposal did not get accepted, however, we have a limited number of time slots for sponsors. If you become a silver sponsor..." In other words, you can submit any crap, as long as you provide "sponsorship".…

Good point, even for non-sponsored talks, they may have an agenda which is based towards certain topics that cover certain technologies for certain companies, you get the point.

Re: Why Your Excellent Conference Talk Was Rejected

#47

Post by slantedview »

> Heartbreaker #4 – The N00b

Everyone is a n00b at some time. But being a conference n00b doesn't mean you're not an expert on the subject of your talk, that your content is not original, that you're not an excellent speaker, or that your talk would not be excellent. All it means is that you're a n00b to public conferences. The wholesale discounting of candidate talks based on such narrow criteria is foolish.

Re: Why Your Excellent Conference Talk Was Rejected

#48

Post by slantedview »

exelius wrote: post #19
DrNuke wrote: post #12

Pretty harsh with the noob, we have all been there in a very distant past, aren't we? Just accept the most promising noobs and pack them all into the same session with a navigate chair and a senior speaker ready to rescue every single talk.

I think it's more "a paid / sponsored conference isn't the best place to get presentation experience". Especially when you have a plethora of experienced presenters to choose from.

The experienced presenters tend to talk about the same things, over and over, at conference after conference. Selecting for "noobs" injects diversity into what is otherwise a well-worn conference circuit by many of the non-noobs.

Re: Why Your Excellent Conference Talk Was Rejected

#49

Post by baby »

wirrbel wrote: post #8

Can't argue much with these criteria. Yet why "previous presenter experience"? If you are afraid of inexperienced speakers to deliver a boring talk, why Not just give them a 10-15 minute slot? Them, I am reminded that many speakers tour many events with the same talk. I rather like the idea of having fresh speakers on stage over the 4th instance of the very same old talk.

> I rather like the idea of having fresh speakers on stage over the 4th instance of the very same old talk.

I'd rather have an experience talker who is used to giving his talk. You know you will get way more out of it.

Post reply on HN