Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Synthia]

We could, possibly, write up some things.

For Day 1 - Outbreaks of Debylian Flu

For Day 2 - Sebiestor Brain Structures. CTCS Crew Replacement Program. Archaelogical Discoveries from the Wombat People. Use of Miniature Robotics in Biological Studies.

Received your expression of interest, still considering it but it looks good. Would you mind writing us a summary of your talk(s) when ready or in draft stage?

That will be Fine.

[Nmaro Makari]

Bumping and also added Morwen Lagann to the Logistical Committee roll.

[Makoto Priano]

Makoto - I love the idea of a roundtable such as you've proposed. We'd need to get some other panelists and develop a structure for audience interaction, but I think something like this would be interesting and a refreshing change from the format seen in previous SeyCons. I'll need to find those other panelists and twist a few arms on the organising committee of course, but I have a lot of things I can use to coerce co-operation if necessary .... 

Baha! Excellent. I'd propose a moderator-and-speakers format, with the moderator trying to control the personalities on stage. It might be fun to have a speaker from each of the major empires-- the 'moderates' of each nation, essentially, while a Syn logi type plays wrangler. We could easily have a set of two seed topics to spur conversation, and then questions as they arise, via the moderator. This would risk substantial overruns on time, but it's not uncommon for roundtables to run over time, or to split up into side conference rooms, etc.

[Synthia]

Has a date been set ?

[Anslol]

So uh....I still don't know what to do/how to write this. Has someone done this in the past who has a template form or presentation...something?? I'm gonna assume there has to be an actual literature review, references, etc from credible real world sources?

[Aelisha Montenagre]

Writing conference papers does not require the explicit literature review process, as you can see in the following: http://www.bnl.gov/isd/documents/32542.pdf.  This is an example format and they can vary.

The main goal of a conference paper is thus:

1. Tell them what you are about to tell them (This paper presents a model of lower-strain drone behaviours)
2. Then tell them (The method used to develop this model was X and the results as shown in Figures a/b/c support/confirm/disprove our hypothesis - followed by results discussion)
3. Then remind them of what you have been telling them (In conclusion our model, as supported by the results, demonstrates that X.  Future work will focus on an experimental approach to validating this model.)

This simpyl approach usually results in a paper of between 5 and 8 pages, with a presentation of no loner than 15 minutes (with another 5 for audience and panel questions). 

I do not know how this will work for SEYCON, as it varies even in real world scenarios, but this is the basic structure.

One thing to remember is that conference papers are NOT journal papers.  Journal papers present novel and original work, including methods, results and analyses.  A conference paper presents novel ideas, with some results to back their worthiness for further exploration, and 'plants the flag', to inform the academic community that this is your little area and you're likely to beat then to future publications - giving a certain element of security in your personal domain. 

As mentioned earlier, I am unsure how the SEYCON organisers work this, so I will refer to their judgement in this matter. 

[Anslol]

So uh...I'd probably need a lab, some very hard to find organisms, lots of petri dishes...ok yeah maybe I can't do this LOL.

[Aelisha Montenagre]

Well, it is a fiction isn't it?  Just look at something vaguely real-world analogous and fiction it up.

[Anslol]

And then get reamed with YDIW and being discredited by people saying I have no idea what I'm saying despite the research done vOv. I don't even know if my topic would work. What are some past topics?

[Aelisha Montenagre]

(EDITED: To elaborate on the first point)

TBH if you're worried of YDIW, roleplaying at all is probably a bad idea - those who are going to call you, I or another out, will find a way to do so beyond the scope of this event, and tbh interesting, fun ideas with the veneer of academic rigour (but obviously not real experimental work) is in itself fun.  Something with more meat than Arek Jalaan, a bit more respect and rigor, that demands a higher calibre while still keeping an open mind.  At least that is my impression. 

I would hope that the moderators of the event have sufficient control of both quality (from submissions and 'questions from the floor) and the pitch of the conference (maybe exploratory work and therefore much more based in semantics/theoreticals instead of solid work) to ensure that YDIW is not an issue. 

Another way of avoiding YDIW is to purposefully pick an obscure topic, conference papers are so focused so as to allow this kind of work without it being complete cloud 9 stuff.  For instance a biological survey of protozoa in a specific volcanic lake on a specific temperate world is completely immune to YDIW, unless you were to say that those organisms were having an impact on the cluster at large. 

I would, however, welcome prior works from other conferences to see exactly what the QA/theme looks like from other events.

[Shintoko Akahoshi]

You can also go look at the transcripts of the past conferences to see how people present their work (which mostly falls into the "how would this be depicted in some hard SF story" camp). If you keep to this level of work, you shouldn't have to worry about anyone harping on you about YDIW.

And if they do, you can ask them to direct their criticism to the Synenose Accord Complaints Department.

Which I volunteer to run.

[Victoria Stecker]

I have fond memories of the first (or maybe second?) conference, highlights included LouLou's graphic detailing interactions with Slave something (heavenbound? Was that seri's kid?), and Kyber's study of some specialized scorpion variant.

While there's some actual research that goes into it, a lot of it ends up simply being fan fiction, presented scientifically.

It basically has a neon sign that says YDIW, but gets a pass for doing it :awesome:

[Louella Dougans]

I have fond memories of the first (or maybe second?) conference, highlights included LouLou's graphic detailing interactions with Slave something (heavenbound? Was that seri's kid?), and Kyber's study of some specialized scorpion variant.

While there's some actual research that goes into it, a lot of it ends up simply being fan fiction, presented scientifically.

It basically has a neon sign that says YDIW, but gets a pass for doing it :awesome:

A report on Sansha's Nation infiltrator technology (from the amarr epic arc)
[spoiler][/spoiler]

A report on the possibility of communicating with Slave Heavenbound02, and Psych-warfare possibilities (from interacting with Heavenbound during the live events)
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]


unrelated bonus content:
[spoiler][/spoiler]

[Synthia]

TBH if you're worried of YDIW, roleplaying at all is probably a bad idea - those who are going to call you, I or another out, will find a way to do so beyond the scope of this event, and tbh interesting, fun ideas with the veneer of academic rigour (but obviously not real experimental work) is in itself fun.  Something with more meat than Arek Jalaan, a bit more respect and rigor, that demands a higher calibre while still keeping an open mind.  At least that is my impression. 

When Arek'Jalaan is mentioned, I think it is worth looking at one of the better projects that came out of it - Project Theseus:
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Project_Theseus

The original proposal was here:
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Arek%27Jaalan_Mailing_List_W4:_project_proposal_-_Project_Theseus_-_suggestions_%26_criticism_requested

The summary of the results:
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Arek%27Jaalan_Mailing_List_W7:_Project_Theseus_conclusions

Something to consider for RP research things, to avoid the YDIW problem, is that finding nothing is at least as scientifically valid and important as finding something. This was a mistake that a lot of A'J things made, as I remember it - a lot of "amazing discovery", some of which contradicted obscure bits of PF, and so on.

"We found no significant relationship between X and Y", and a discussion of why that may be the case (limits of measuring equipment, sample size, invalid assumptions, etc. ) provides as much scientific RP as finding something does.

[Merdaneth]

Love to come and do an presentation, but currently without an active EVE account....