[PS] operational change to support not messing things up (any more)

[krista ernewein]

okie, I have placed this in program notes "GOH schedule sent for
approval 12/03/07"
for ones that are not exclictly for a GoH in the title.

thanks to michael for troubleshooting my calls tonight!
-KE

On 12/3/07, Tracy Gangwer <trgangwer at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 3, 2007 1:23 PM, Rachel Silber <rachel.silber at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The following things would make it easier to get to the programming notes at
> > the right moment:
> > 1)  active links from session id on the Maintain Room Schedule (
> > http://two-step.netbusters.com/~trg/arisia08/MaintainRoomSched.php) page.
>
> done.
>
> > 2) active links from session id on the following reports that I'm likely to
> > be using to resolve conflicts
> >
> > http://two-step.netbusters.com/~trg/arisia08/allpartschedbyparttimereport.php
> > http://two-step.netbusters.com/~trg/arisia08/allroomschedreport.php
> > http://two-step.netbusters.com/~trg/arisia08/allroomschedtimereport.php
> >  http://two-step.netbusters.com/~trg/arisia08/allroomschedtrackreport.php
>
> done.
>
> > 3) a box on the manage session page in which I could search by number for a
> > session given the id.
>
> Not tonight...   too much work for tonight.
>
> > I'm glad to have the feedback about not circumventing the design of the
> > tool.  I'd love to hear from other program staff people about what they
> > think will work for them.
> > Rachel
> >
> >
> > On Dec 3, 2007 1:10 PM, Tracy Gangwer <trgangwer at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > All kinds of interesting notes could be in there.
> > > Just ignoring them is almost certainly wrong.
> > > Where do you need them to show up?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > trg
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Dec 3, 2007 12:55 PM, Rachel Silber <rachel.silber at gmail.com > wrote:
> > > > The point of my suggestion is that the rest of the schedule is still (I
> > > > think) subject to a significant amount of change and that means that
> > it's
> > > > still possible for us to inadvertently move the wrong things when we are
> > > > resolving issues. If you're going to be editing the panel descriptions
> > > > anyway, adding (GOH) as a prefix to the title will really be helpful.
> > As
> > > > you have noticed, the notes to program committee are not easily visible
> > when
> > > > you're working with the scheduling screens, but the program title is.
> > > >
> > > > Rachel
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 3, 2007 12:47 PM, krista ernewein < kernewein at gmail.com > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Tonight, I plan to make some adjustments to changes made yesterday. I
> > plan
> > > > to call Michael and chat wiht him beofre moving panels (or rather
> > undoing
> > > > panel changes) Afterwards I will make time to put in the program notes
> > that
> > > > a GoH is on the panel.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then I will send out the schedule to be reviewed (as i promised would
> > > > happen). Hopefully few changes will need to made afterwards. that's my
> > game
> > > > plan so far and happy to hear thoughts.
> > > > > -Krista
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 12/3/07, Rachel Silber <rachel.silber at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Until we get the schedule kind of firmed up, and everyone more
> > familiar
> > > > with this year's interesting constraints, we really need a way to mark
> > > > certain items as special items that should only be changed with the
> > > > permission of the programming divhead.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My suggestion is to add a prefix to all the relevant titles.  I
> > would
> > > > say that that prefix could be GOH, but it should also be put on the
> > 501st
> > > > panels and *possibly* on panels that have special requirements.   Would
> > the
> > > > letters DHO (for DivHeadOnly) be clear enough?  Or DNM (Do Not Move)?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Zambia folks, I am making a feature request for a checkbox that puts
> > > > this prefix (whatever we decide it is) into a title field in the reports
> > and
> > > > operational screens but doesn't change the title in the database so we
> > can
> > > > give clean data to pubs.  Likely that's not something we can do Right
> > Now,
> > > > but for the next few weeks until pubs is the major database consumer it
> > > > seems reasonable for us to change the data.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any comments on this idea?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rachel
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>