Differences between revisions 1 and 2
Revision 1 as of 2004-12-27 20:07:59
Size: 1735
Comment: Create page for reviewer notes
Revision 2 as of 2005-01-01 21:31:24
Size: 2140
Editor: SteveHolden
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 17: Line 17:
REMEMBER: if you want your comments to be visible to the proposal's author, you MUST uncheck the "keep comments private" box in the review form.
Please try to avoid unnecessarily negative comments in publicly-visible comments. If you have suggestions that would improve a proposal it would normally be helpful to make them visible, allowing the author to respond (hopefully with an updated proposal).

This page explains the duties of reviewers on the program committee. Committee members can add questions and observations to this page. Do not refer to specific proposals on this page, because this page is publicly visible.

Reviewers have logins on http://submit.pycon.org, just like proposal authors. Reviewers have the additional privilege of being able to view other proposals and to record comments and votes on them.

Proposals will be assessed using the [http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~oscar/Champion/champion.html Identify the Champion] process. Basically, reviewers vote using a +/- 1, +/- 0 scale. To be accepted, a paper must have at least one +1 vote; the person who votes +1 on a paper is the paper's champion.

When reviewers log in, their web page will list their own proposals as well as a bunch of hyperlinks to various specialized lists of proposals. The most important list is the one of proposals still needing reviews. Reviewers can then view those proposals and record your vote on it along with additional comments.

REMEMBER: if you want your comments to be visible to the proposal's author, you MUST uncheck the "keep comments private" box in the review form. Please try to avoid unnecessarily negative comments in publicly-visible comments. If you have suggestions that would improve a proposal it would normally be helpful to make them visible, allowing the author to respond (hopefully with an updated proposal).

Reviewers should join [http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pycon-pc/ the pycon-pc mailing list], which is for program committee discussions.

When a proposal is submitted, three reviewers are randomly assigned to it. Those assignments aren't enforced, so reviewers should feel free to skip proposals assigned to them that they don't feel competent to review. Conversely, reviewers can always review proposals assigned to other people, and doing so is greatly encouraged.


CategoryPyCon2005

PyCon2007/ReviewerNotes (last edited 2008-11-15 14:00:43 by localhost)

Unable to edit the page? See the FrontPage for instructions.