Re: [Tccc] summary of current conference concerns v4

I think such discussions are not too helpful in the abstract. The conferences sponsored by TCCC are listed at

http://www.comsoc.org/%7Etccc/events.html

(The list seems somewhat out of date, but presumably reflects the general gist of TCCC-sponsored events.)

Are there events on that list that you would consider withdrawing support from?

I think a common development of conferences is that they start focused on one topic, but then become general networking conferences, possibly with somewhat of a slant (e.g., more upper layer or more performance-oriented). In some cases, such as ICNP, they do that successfully, in others less so.

My suspicion is that the vast majority of conferences these days draw mostly authors. Some large conferences mask this by having associated workshops, so that workshop authors can attend the main conference.

Henning

On Jan 3, 2010, at 4:54 PM, Craig Partridge wrote:

>
> Hi Joe:
>
> I cannot tell from your note if we are roughly agreeing or disagreeing.
>
> So let me try upleveling and see if we agree or disagree.
>
> * I think we agree that COMSOC and the TC needs to sunset conferences and that
> long-established meetings sometimes don't get enough scrutiny.
>
> * I think we disagree about what kind of scrutiny is appropriate.
> I, based on my IEEE and ACM experience, find that the simply tracking
> if the conference sticks to its usual review process and character
> and assuming that if interest is lost then finances fall short is
> a slow and not always effective way to sunset conferences.
>
> (I can name a number of IEEE conferences and some ACM conferences that
> everyone I knew felt lingered too long).
>
> * I think we agree that whatever metrics we use for scrutiny should
> be rigorous and measure a relevant feature. We have some disagreement
> about whether citations or other impact ratings should be part of
> the process. Note that I'm NOT arguing this should be the sole
> measure -- there are reasons for meetings that don't get reflected in
> citations/impact numbers. But I'd like us to start requesting some
> consistent across conferences and independent (and/or hard to fudge)
> metrics beyond simply finances and attendence and, if we are requiring
> them in IEEE (we're not in ACM), I'd like to encourage your panel to
> examine if we're using the right metrics.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Craig
> _______________________________________________
> Tccc mailing list
> Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
>

_______________________________________________
Tccc mailing list
Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc