RejectCon

[bascule]

Re: RejectCon

Don't involve me in this! My volunteer time to support Defcon is done before and after Defcon with the forums and other stuff, so that I can enjoy my time at Defcon.

Crazy hippies....

;-)

All right, guess I'll find someone else to involve in my crazy hippie shenanigans

[TheCotMan]

Re: RejectCon

That sounds great (informing rejected talks about RejectCon)... is anyone else interested in helping organize it?

CotMan? :)

Don't involve me in this! My volunteer time to support Defcon is done before and after Defcon with the forums and other stuff, so that I can enjoy my time at Defcon.

Crazy hippies....

;-)

[bascule]

Re: RejectCon

That sounds great (informing rejected talks about RejectCon)... is anyone else interested in helping organize it?

CotMan? :)

[Nikita]

Re: RejectCon

Well, 8 months post facto I'd like to throw this back on the table.
.

I'm still in support of you doing this as well. I would like to see you guys figure out how you're going to do it before we start rejecting Defcon submissions though, work out the kinks amongst yourselves. That way if it's possible I can at least incorporate this event in and pass on free advertising on the behalf of the organizers. For example: Sorry you we not accepted but maybe you should consider contacting x at X unofficial/official event where you may alternatively present your Foo.

I still like the confessions booth idea as well, regardless of it's relation to reject con.

[bascule]

Re: RejectCon

Well, 8 months post facto I'd like to throw this back on the table.

For those too lazy to visit the OP, the basic idea is that people whose talks were rejected and/or joe schmo can sign up to do a lightning talk (5-10 minutes)

This could be a formally sanctioned event, or it could effectively be unofficial. In the former case, the entire series of lightning talks could take the place of a single official talk, and there'd be goons present to yoink the crimethinc-types who are talking about blowing up buildings off stage. In the latter case, well... there'd still probably be a goon, although perhaps the subject matter could be slightly more risque.

The talks would run until a hard stop (10 minutes?) or until the boos from the crowd grow loud enough that the organizer (me?) cuts the talk off (with a gong, and possibly a giant hooked cane?) Each talk could be stopped at 5 minutes, and the crowd asked whether or not they want to hear more.

Another possible format was described by CotMan: a booth would be open Thursday or Friday for people to appear and effectively do a video mini-CFP. Anyone wishing to give a lightning talk could give a boiled-down 30 second version to the camera. That night, the footage could be reviewed and lightning talks selected, then the next day the winning rejects could be posted, along with some "standby" people in case the winners don't show up or start going on some rant about civil disobedience at the Republican National Convention.

My gut feeling is there's a long tail of potentially cool presentations which have enough material for a lightning talk but not enough for a full-fledged talk.

[sk00t]

Re: RejectCon

Please, oh please, let there be a gong. If someone provides a gong I'll provide a solenoid clacker.

If you all will be at the forum meet let's get together and see what we can come up with for next year...

Just tie the solenoid in with a db meter measuring crowd response (bonus points for differentiating boos versus claps) and you've got a freaking contest.

[bloofar]

Re: RejectCon

Please, oh please, let there be a gong. If someone provides a gong I'll provide a solenoid clacker.

[Exist]

Re: RejectCon

Yeah this a great idea, however instead of giving everyone 7.5 mins, we should give them 3 mins and if in the first 3 mins the lecture is crap we all boo and that means they need to get the fuck off the stage haha! If the lecture is good, we all clap for 10 secs and then the lecturer knows to continue. You know this would be interesting as hell

[sk00t]

Re: RejectCon

Well, if there isn't space there isn't space. If there's somewhere it could happen, quasi-formally, I'd be willing to help organize it (but do you really want a hippie organizing anything?). Otherwise, might be something to put together for DC16.

Yeah, I think next year is a good idea. Just to propose extending it a bit, how about RejectGong? Rejected talks and other random ideas come up on stage, and a panel gongs them after (x) minutes and crowd response, and selects a winner at the end.

Sounds fun to me. Maybe submit as a talk in a two hour slot during the normal con hours?

Just a thought.

[bascule]

Re: RejectCon

I like this idea as well, but just like a new unofficial event I'll see what happens. We are at max space for this year, so even if we wanted to totally embrace it we are booked full.

Well, if there isn't space there isn't space. If there's somewhere it could happen, quasi-formally, I'd be willing to help organize it (but do you really want a hippie organizing anything?). Otherwise, might be something to put together for DC16.

[Dark Tangent]

Re: RejectCon

I like this idea as well, but just like a new unofficial event I'll see what happens. We are at max space for this year, so even if we wanted to totally embrace it we are booked full.

[Nikita]

Re: RejectCon

I don't recall anyone asking you or whoever else to "verify" rejection letters. Which is why I suggested that "rejected talks" be judged based on whether or not it's good enough to be presented, even if only for 5 minutes.

I didn't say anyone did, I only pointed out a flaw in thinking a reject is a reject. I also felt it important to mention sometimes we reject people for good reason. Defcon may have different views than you on what is good enough to be presented or allowed to be presented and we are not going to share those views, nor rejection letters, or info from those who submit. Had this been given enough thought and it wasnt so last minute we may have been able to direct people to this type of avenue as an alternative means of getting their 2 cents heard.

Hell I think this is a good idea even if there is no rejection letter in the picture.

Agreed, especially regarding the rejection letter.

Bascule or whoever wants to set this shit up, would obviously be the person to go to, if you wanted to make a talk at rejectcon. Whoever is the go-to person, would obviously weed out the lame proposals for talks.

What Cot suggested seemed like a really great idea, the confessions booth. It may be a good compromise. I also said I can see this get off the ground quicker and with more DC cooperation if it was not such a big production and someone was specifically tasked to review the 5-10 minutes presentations and show them after the fact. There would be lag, but at least they could get seen at the show. It would also soften the blow of those that are rejected because their content was not good enough, twice. Imagine how you may feel being rejected at rejectcon.... I wouldn't mind seeing a blend of 5 minute "You need to hear this" talks mixed in with a few "I confess I want to run away with DJ jackalope/ I'm in love with priest confessions" All of which is a moot point because it's probably too close to the con at this point.

Setting up 5 minute talks is not rocket science, put that military tactics book away.

There is also no harm done in mentioning that there are a lot of things to be considered beforehand, let alone if Defcon would even allow it on the convention floor space. Technically it would be a speaking track, which could be in direct conflict for Defcon. Also, We are very close to the show. A lot of people who would be involved in helping you set something up like this may not have the time or space to deal with this so late in the game and that's all i have to say on it.

Actually, it would be terrible if "who at where dot com" were a rule. Google already returns 8 million results for "* at * dot com". "who at where dot com" is just security by obscurity, and clearly it's not really obscurity at this point :)

Yes i agree that is it security by obscurity, now. However, The littlest and stupidest of the bunch are weeded out, if it was your email spammed as much, ( not to say it isn't) you would appreciate that every little bit helps. I know myself personally i try to remember as often as i can not to post other peoples email addresses as "@.com"

[klepto]

Re: RejectCon

No, a letter will not suffice as you have no idea if that is really from us, I will not verify 240 rejection letters for you. Also, you do not know why we rejected a presentation, sometimes we have very good reason to attempt to negate a persons need for a microphone and an audience. Letting them jump on stage all Willy Nilly style is a breeding ground for law suits and offended souls.

I don't recall anyone asking you or whoever else to "verify" rejection letters. Which is why I suggested that "rejected talks" be judged based on whether or not it's good enough to be presented, even if only for 5 minutes. Hell I think this is a good idea even if there is no rejection letter in the picture. Bascule or whoever wants to set this shit up, would obviously be the person to go to, if you wanted to make a talk at rejectcon. Whoever is the go-to person, would obviously weed out the lame proposals for talks.

Nowhere near the majority of the people find/hack things or does research based on defcon's call for papers timetable. Which is why I believe RejectCon to be a good idea.

As an unofficial event you may be able to get this off the ground on your own with russ's help perhaps, but do be aware you are taking on a great responsibility of hosting a mini-con within a con. The idea has potential, but I am sure there is a vast amount of logistics being cast to the side here. There are liabilities and responsibleness yet to be thought of. and as someone important said recently we are getting close to 30 days out till the show...

Setting up 5 minute talks is not rocket science, put that military tactics book away.

[bascule]

Re: RejectCon

Please consider munging on teh intah-webs. Please write [at] instead of @ and [dot] com instead of . I'm not sure if this is a rule, but if it is not it should be.

Actually, it would be terrible if "who at where dot com" were a rule. Google already returns 8 million results for "* at * dot com". "who at where dot com" is just security by obscurity, and clearly it's not really obscurity at this point :)

As an unofficial event you may be able to get this off the ground on your own with russ's help perhaps, but do be aware you are taking on a great responsibility of hosting a mini-con within a con. The idea has potential, but I am sure there is a vast amount of logistics being cast to the side here. There are liabilities and responsibleness yet to be thought of. and as someone important said recently we are getting close to 30 days out till the show...

I realize bringing this sort of event to DEFCON is markedly more difficult. Cot Man's approach sounds awesome, if someone were willing to take on the task of editorial review.

Also note: I suck at organizing anything, unless it's networks of interconnected computers, but even in that case I write a program to do it for me.

[Nikita]

Re: RejectCon

Another option is to bring out the idea from last year.... A "Confession Booth" but instead have a, "mini presentation booth," so people could make their presentation in front of just a camera, and then the person running the event could review each mini presentation and choose what is published online.
Then the only worries during con revolve around risk of theft or vandalism to equipment, and then the time to go through all of the footage after con.

Holy crap that would be a good idea if it could be done right. I wouldn't be opposed to the confessions themselves either. I can imagine a few "I am sorry I put your doj credentials on the wall of sheep...really I am...." confessions. ;-) It would be cool TV stuff which if someone is all over it and keeping up with the people "confessing" maybe a sign up by appointment sheet. Then maybe it could be shown on the projector in the contest area. Again, these things couldn't be done in real time and would need someone to review the confessions/presentations first and then use best judgment. Perhaps set this up this year, take it slow, see how it works and see if we can get info booth to show the quick 5 minute videos periodically on the screen. If it works you can at least have a little experience with it and can plan bigger for next year.