An alternative way to program a SwanCon

[tommo]

I was going to post this as a reply on someone else's journal, but I think it's an interesting enough point to be a post of it's own.

I've been wondering whether the job of programmer should really be divided up further than it currently is. Have a head programmer to run and timetable the whole thing and generally be in charge, but then have sub-programmers responsible for different streams. You could have a media fan organising some TV and movie panels, a lit fan organising some book panels, avid gamer for gaming panels, anime buff for anime panels, and so on. And the head programmer gives them each a certain number of panel slots they have to fill up. I think that could result in a much more well-balanced programme.

What do people think? It'd swell the numbers in a committee somewhat, but I think if it was done well and everyone involved put in the required effort, you'd probably end up with a stellar programme. And it'd take some of the burden away from the head programmer, who tends to do a hell of a lot of work putting it all together.

Comments

[justadecoy.livejournal.com]

That sounds kind of like the way GenghisCon is doing it (at least this year).
We have a gaming stream person, a video stream person and a panel stream person and then a program co-ordinator to make it all work together nicely.

On a SwanCon scale that sounds like a really cool idea, it would certainly help to get things in balance more. I'm not sure how the rules of committee works in SwanCon but if bloat was an issue then perhaps it could be run as a subcommittee with the head programmer reporting back?

[angriest.livejournal.com]

You'd need a head programmer with the ability to veto their subcommittee's choices though.

[firvulag.livejournal.com]

I agree with at least having a consultant for each of the areas so that the programmer ends up with some idea about what each area needs.

This year certainly benefited from having a gamer running the gaming stream/room.

[callistra.livejournal.com]

I like the idea but find it difficult to imagine in practice.

[col-ki.livejournal.com]

As was said, this is the way GenghisCon has always done it.

The downsides are that:
a) You create cracks for people/panels/etc to fall into
b) You need a lot of communication to make sure keynote things don't get scheduled at the same time
c) It makes the final week before the timetable is published that much harder

[ataxi.livejournal.com]

This is a type of project management.

I think if you do this you effectively need a bit more ahead of time commitment, i.e. all the sub-programmers agreeing to finalise the panels they're organising and the majority of the panellists by some date in advance of the con, say a month. At this time all the work not done and responsibilities are transferred to the main programmer, without necessarily needing a guilt factor or what have you.

That way you get what you can out of the process without having to rely on flaky people at the last minute.

The uber-programmer would need that time remaining to rebalance the varying efforts of the volunteer minions. And they would vary.

[alias_sqbr]

Thinking about the unwieldy list your next post has created, any individual person could wear multiple hats. Just a thought.

[utopos.livejournal.com]

The role of programmer as I've always seen it (and seen it done effectively over the years) is to:
1. Cater to as many broad categories as possible without personal bias (aesthetic bias is theoretically ok) and
2. Allow for the study, expression and promotion of SF culture in as many ways as possible within the 100-150 slots available over the duration of the con.

Essential for the former is the willingness to outsource development on items on topics out of the programmer's (presumably formidable) range of knowledge - and the willingness to recognise when something may be awry in the balance of the program (says someone who fell into programming as a result of the latter).

Fortunately open programming meetings have been relatively regular in the past - and now shrydar's wonderful work on the website has taken the community collaboration aspect of running the con that extra step further I believe we're seeing significant improvements.

For management purposes I'd prefer multiple programmers (maybe two) with the Convenor (or maybe the Vice - someone senior and logisticy) having final say on what goes on where and when.