Re: Survey: Use of this list for Calls for Papers

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
wrote:

> Besides being the primary W3C outlet for SW related topics,
>> semantic-web@w3.org is in my feeling also the primary outlet for the
>> research community in this area. So, spreading calls for papers there is as
>> natural as using dbworld in the databases community.
>>
>> My feeling is that of we ban CfPs on this list, we cut one of the major
>> distribution channels for CfPs in our community.
>>
>
> I absolutely agree. In fact CfPs are one of the reasons why I am on this
> mailinglist.
>

Sorry but I cannot see how CFPs contribute to research.
Sending post conference / workshop summaries probably would but sending
CFPs for a conference multiple times for multiple tracks & multiple
workshops, sometimes deadline extensions and early bird / late
registrations sounds more like spam. I am saying this knowing that I have
also done this a few times.

Personally I have ~250 distinct CFPs in my inbox from 2016 alone and I
already know where I plan to submit without looking at any CFP. Actually
when I want to look up something I search online and not on my mails
anymore because it is easier.

Looking at public-lod in March I see ~ 30-40% of emails related to cfps and
~20% are related to ESWC alone.
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2016Mar/subject.html

This is not to say that we should ban CFPs but there must be something we
can do to improve this situation.

Best,
Dimitris

-- 
Kontokostas Dimitris

Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2016 18:41:34 UTC