[games_access] same proposal in multiple tracks

Eelke Folmer eelke.folmer at gmail.com
Sun Sep 30 23:55:51 EDT 2007

Hey Michelle,

Thanks for your elaborate feedback.
I was just curious what would be the best approach for GDC.

If anyone wants me to go over their proposal let me know.

cheers Eelke

On 9/30/07, d. michelle hinn <hinn at uiuc.edu> wrote:

> Just a side -- I'm trying to share as much as I know about the GDC

> process after having done the proposals for 05, 06, and 07. It's nice

> to have more people working round the clock with me at the deadline

> -- I really, really appreciate it and it's so great to have the

> feeling that we're all one team working together for the same goal.

> The hardest thing for me has been that it takes a lot of time to

> advise all while I'm trying to do the other write ups. But that's how

> we learn as a group!


> Michelle


> >Ok, there's a history behind the two audio tracks. The advisory

> >board for this is the same as it was for Austin and they invited us.

> >What we found was enormous support from the audio people for the

> >auditory part. So I'm adding a note at the top of the expanded

> >abstract to explain why these are split and if they prefer, the two

> >talks can be put together as they were in Austin.

> >

> >Note: Notes are ok in your expanded outline if you are explaining

> >something weird. Yeah, I know this sounds risky but I don't think

> >that these two are. Remember -- it's an advisory board selection

> >rather than a formal review. The rules for this are not the same as

> >an academic conference. And if you are ax-ed by one track...that's

> >where it ends. They have too many submissions to bother suggesting

> >another track, which is why they get pretty specific about what they

> >are looking for. That's been my experience.

> >

> >As for the other two, these are trickier and I know what you are

> >saying. That's why they need to be as unique as possible. Reid is

> >proposing a technical talk for programming. The one you and he are

> >working on is a business track proposal (keep in mind that they will

> >want to grill you about numbers). But they aren't the same proposals.

> >

> >The double audio tracks are also not the same proposals as yours and

> >Reids -- these are design and "show off" sessions, appealing more to

> >designers. And they are aimed at some the biggest supporters of GA

> >-- the Audio People and they are audio design sessions. Believe me

> >(and Richard would agree) the the Audio talk is WAY different than

> >your proposals. We've given it already. :) And I think our reviews

> >from that session suggest that we should do this again at GDC San

> >Fran (Big GDC) to an audience of even more audio designers.

> >

> >So there's no trickery the way I see it by what has happened with

> >these proposals. I think that they do belong in multiple tracks and

> >that they AREN'T merely repeats of the same talk. And they shouldn't

> >be when planning for them if accepted. If in the end the proposals

> >look exactly the same, then we've done something wrong. Yes, my

> >experience is that we will probably get about 2-4 of these accepted

> >(out of 11) so we do need lots of proposals. But I don't think we

> >are unfairly stacking the deck here.

> >

> >Michelle

> >

> >>hi,

> >>

> >>I'm seeing the same proposal in multiple tracks:

> >>

> >>-When Audio IS the game experience: Gamers with Visual Disabilities

> >>(Richard/Michelle)

> >>-When Audio IS the game experience: Gamers with Auditory Disabilities

> >>(Reid/Michelle)

> >>

> >>- Selling more games by adding CC (Reid/ Eelke)

> >>- Creating Dynamic Closed Captioning Systems (Reid)

> >>

> >>Its good to be pervasive to increase our chances of acceptance but it

> >>might also bite us in the back. In my fields of research it is

> >>generally not a good idea to submit the same proposal to multiple

> >>tracks. Generally reviewers will review a proposal and if they deem it

> >>to be suitable for another track they will usually suggest that.

> >>Submitting the same proposal to multiple tracks is usually considered

> >>spamming. Michelle do you know for GDC whether proposals are reviewed

> >>on an individual basis or do they look at who is submitting what to

> >>which track? I do want us to get as much proposals accepted as

> >>possible but I suggest we play by the rules.

> >>

> >>Cheers Eelke

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> >>Eelke Folmer Assistant Professor

> >>Department of CS&E/171

> >>University of Nevada Reno, Nevada 89557

> >>Game interaction design www.helpyouplay.com

> >>----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> >>_______________________________________________

> >>games_access mailing list

> >>games_access at igda.org

> >>http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access

> >

> >_______________________________________________

> >games_access mailing list

> >games_access at igda.org

> >http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access


> _______________________________________________

> games_access mailing list

> games_access at igda.org

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access


Eelke Folmer Assistant Professor
Department of CS&E/171
University of Nevada Reno, Nevada 89557
Game interaction design www.helpyouplay.com

More information about the games_access mailing list