[sigcomm] attendance policies for SIGCOMM-affiliated events

[Joe Touch]

Larry Peterson wrote:
> If the issue is a transparent invitation policy, then I don't think
> anyone is arguing otherwise. However, this notion that the PC/chairs
> are playing favorites and stacking the deck is both bewildering and
> insulting.
>
> In the interest of putting forward a tangible proposal that we can
> discuss, I propose a transparent policy that roughly matches past
> practice:
> 
>   o the PC and SC
>   o one author per paper
>   o as many students as we have scholarships for (preferring
>     co-authors of accepted papers and then co-authors of
>     submitted papers)
>   o sponsor representatives (e.g., from NSF)

(minor nit: ACM sponsors meetings; the NSF, companies, etc. are called
'supporters')

Supporters of a specific meeting often get a slot as part of their
support for the meetings they support, but they should not get any
particular privileges at meetings they don't support or any other
non-attendee privileges.

> This gets us to roughly 80-90%. Then, at the Chair/PC's discretion:
> 
>   o as many second authors or authors of rejected papers as we can
>     fit, perhaps with a slight bias for students/faculty at the hosting
>     site.

Authors of rejected papers makes some sense - they've already expressed
interest and effort, but it should be random.

As to bias towards the hosting site, see "playing favorites/stacking
decks" above.

Joe

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://www.postel.org/pipermail/sigcomm/attachments/20051109/db9d1214/signature-0001.bin