I did this. Why were low ranking submissions in the same category accepted over higher ranking ones?  If you sort each category, you find that some high-ranking submissions were not accepted.  Why was this?

I can provide precise figures if you want.  To be clear, are you using average scores, as you said? Or sum?

On 03/06/2014 20:36, Edward Saperia wrote:

They were sorted into categories (wikimedia, technology, free culture, etc), and slots were apportioned by approximately how many high ranking (>8) submissions there were in each category. The idea was to provide a good programme for a diversity of interests.

I had to make a couple of judgement calls, especially on sessions that asked for a longer slot. How you compare a one hour session rated 8.6 to two 30 minute sessions rated 8.4?

Bear in mind the ranking system isn't perfect; it's hard to rank consistently across 500 items, and the difference between an 8.4 and an 8.6 is just noise, really. Anything above 8 is already a "strong accept"!

Edward Saperia

Chief Coordinator Wikimania London

email • facebook • twitter • 07796955572

133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l