On 07/13/2010 05:24 PM, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 05:19:28PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> On 07/12/2010 02:31 AM, Richard Darst wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 09:55:52AM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >>> >>>> To recap the proposals: >>>> >>>> (0 is the status quo) >>>> >>>> 0: 10:00-12:00, LUNCH, 14:00-16:00, Break, 16:30-19:30 >>>> >>>> M: 9:30-12:30, LUNCH, 14:00-18:00 >>>> X: 9:30-11:30, LUNCH, 13:00-15:00, Break, 15:30-18:30 >>>> Y: 9:00-12:00, LUNCH, 13:30-15:30, Break, 16:00-18:00 >>>> Z: 9:30-11:30, LUNCH, 12:30-14:30, Break, 15:00-18:00 >>> >>> Which of these was eventually selected? >> >> None has been selected. schultmc was the only person good enough to >> voice an opinion (he prefers Z). Of course, i'm assuming that marga >> prefers M. >> >> I actually prefer Y myself, i think, though i understand that a 9am >> start time is considered cruel and unusual by several usually vocal >> parties (though i don't think that concern has been voiced in this thread). > > Anything but Y, with a preference for 0. I'm not a morning person. X out > of the 9:30 start options - an hour seems a bit tight for lunch.
In particular, this line of rescheduling is prompted by early closing
hours of the dining hall where most meals will be eaten. It is open for
dinner from 17:00-19:00, as i understand it.
0 and X both make it so that there will not be much time for attendees
of the later sessions to actually get dinner.
--dkg
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
