Assia Mahboubi (Jan 19 2022 at 11:16): Assia Mahboubi (Jan 19 2022 at 11:16):And this is a showstopper for many. I will personally be unable to attend, for family reasons, despite the exciting line-up of invited and contributed talks.
On 2021, it was exceptionally not the case. What about deciding that from 2023 on (or 2024, if it's already too late for 23), the CoqPL workshop takes place on a working day ? It would be a strong, effective action for increasing diversity, both in the program and in the audience.
Théo Zimmermann (Jan 19 2022 at 11:22):Hey Assia, I'm also very disappointed that CoqPL is taking place on a Saturday. But in defense of the CoqPL organizers, all the workshops associated with POPL happen during the weekend, and they didn't really have a choice. What do you propose to do? To make the CoqPL workshop independent of POPL? Or do you have an idea on how to force the POPL organizers to put it on another day?
Théo Zimmermann (Jan 19 2022 at 11:22):Personally, I'm also saddened by the price it costs to attend CoqPL online (you have to pay the $100+ for POPL). In terms of diversity, this also hurts.
Assia Mahboubi (Jan 19 2022 at 11:27):Thank you @Théo Zimmermann , I forgot to make explicit that I know from first-hand experience that the organizers of CoqPL are not responsible for this choice of a date. Note that I did not blame anyone here, the POPL organizing team also has crazy constraints, this year in particular. I would just like this to stop, and the 2021 is a constructive witness that it is possible.
Karl Palmskog (Jan 19 2022 at 11:28):affiliated workshops generally don't have choice. We were assigned Aug 12 for the Coq Workshop by FLoC organizers, which is a Friday but still bad, as it has a one-day gap before the end of ITP
Assia Mahboubi (Jan 19 2022 at 11:34):Théo Zimmermann said:
What do you propose to do? To make the CoqPL workshop independent of POPL? Or do you have an idea on how to force the POPL organizers to put it on another day?
At the very least, the workshop application could make this request explicit.
Assia Mahboubi (Jan 19 2022 at 11:35):I have no idea if it was the case this year though.
Karl Palmskog (Jan 19 2022 at 11:37):for FLoC at least, the possible workshop days (Aug 11 & Aug 12) were already defined before the applications were sent in
Karl Palmskog (Jan 19 2022 at 11:39):at least POPL is POPL year after year (so this could perhaps be negotiated with POPL steering committee?), but the federation changes quite a lot of the Coq Workshop I feel
Bas Spitters (Jan 19 2022 at 12:45):Small remark about co-location, the SIGplan climate committee argued in favor of this, as it really does seem to have an impact to organize workshops together at a hub. Moreover, it may cut down travel time/costs. This is a diversity issue too, I believe.
Yannick Zakowski (Jan 19 2022 at 17:49):I agree that this request makes a lot of sense, but independently from whether it can be negotiated against the POPL organizing committee, I feel like it is still unclear what would be the exact request we wish for. If CPP remains affiliated with POPL, it seems unalterable (I would imagine, I might be wrong) that the five work day of the «main week» are covered for CPP (2 days) + POPL (3 days). In order to avoid using the weekend, would we prefer:
Yannick Forster (Jan 20 2022 at 11:21):Maybe we could - for this year only - ask authors of CoqPL abstracts whether they would be willing to either give their talk again during the POPL virtual workshop times (27th-29th). Possibly but not necessarily then even during a more European-centric timeframe. If people don't give their talks again we could still have question-and-answer sessions and attendees watch the recorded videos beforehand. That would mitigate some of the bad impact from the choice of date, independent from what happens in the future
Last updated: Sep 30 2023 at 05:01 UTC