[yapc] Talk submissions are closed

Scott Walters scott at slowass.net
Thu Apr 29 11:14:55 PDT 2010

> Rob,
> I know you meant well by this, but please, NEVER encourage anyone to
> do their not-accepted long talk as a lightning talk.  It simply won't
> fit in the time allotted, and makes the speaker look like a desperate
> fool.  A lightning talk is a completely different beast from any other
> kind, and is something you write from the ground up as a lightning
> talk.
> Cheers,
> David.

I'd like to politely descent here.  Having a full length talk rejected 
is not a sure indication that that speaker should not be speaking, 
period.  The organizers do their best based on knowledge of speakers
and audiance interests to pick the best talks.  This is an approximate
process.  Rejection does not indicate universal comdenation by the

And even if the speaker would be making a fool of himself by overtly
promoting something, demonstrating profound ignorance of important
matters, being even new to Perl, new to the format, having poorly
adapted a talk -- putting in for a Lightning Talks is *still*
appropriate.  He might not be accepted for that either, but as
Lightning Talks were explained to me, it is a not inappropriate
venue for just standing up and saying "hi, I'm new to the Perl
community, these are my first impressions" or so on.

Again, I don't expect to change your opinion of how these matters
should or do work, and likewise, please excuse me for interjecting
my conflicting opinion here and taking the chance to continue to
encourage everyone with every stupid idea to continue to put in
for Lighting Talks, no matter what.


More information about the yapc mailing list