60 likes | 72 Views
Discover Michael Stonebraker's advice on how to ensure CIDR maintains its scholarly rigor, avoids the "loosy goosey" papers, and doesn't become irrelevant. Learn about the importance of slanted selection of program committee members, non-SIGMOD reviewing guidelines, and avoiding the SIGMODification of CIDR.
E N D
CIDR is in danger of losing its way:My Advice to Weikum, Hellerstein and FranklinbyMichael Stonebraker
Program Committees in our Field • Reward scholarship on narrow ideas • Trash “loosy goosey” papers • Trash anything half-baked • Trash anything that resembles a “war story” • Operate by consensus Net result: SIGMOD/VLDB style conferences with paper sessions full of LPUs, of interest to 10 people in the world
How Has CIDR Avoided this Fate So Far? • Slanted selection of PC members • Specific “non-SIGMOD” reviewing guidelines • PC is advisory – organizers make actual decisions • And one of them reads every paper • And the organizers have not operated by consensus • E.g. PC reviews sometimes ignored
CIDR Leadership is Being Passed On • So how to avoid the SIGMODification of CIDR? • Answer: double-blind reviewing (just kidding)
My Real Advice to the “New Gray Beards” • Put your own mark on the conference • E.g. might make sense to move to “demo-only” on the theory that “you have nothing to say if you can’t show it” • E.g. might make sense to move to “poster-only” on the theory that this fosters discussion • YGIGH (your good idea goes here)
My Real Advice to the “New Gray Beards” • Ruthlessly ignore reviewer opinions • This is really crucial • Don’t leave Asilomar • Enables a 3 person organizing committee – who can make decisions quickly and easily • Figure out some solution to “paper overload” • Which is very likely to descend on CIDR