Enjoyed the first "real" #pdxwp session last night. Justin's presentation was great, as was the peek at Vidoop's CAPTCHA plugin. Looking forward to next month (@natronics and CSS?).

I definitely didn't get that vibe from this post, either. This post just reminded me that I wanted some of those folks to just get over it.

That said, though, Aaron's post (and Josh's comment) will no doubt help people who didn't get picked this time figure out how they could do things better next time around.

I've heard of some grumblings from people whose submissions were rejected this last time around, folks who implied that you had to be in with the LoT people to have a chance of acceptance.

Wah.

I don't know the LoT people well. Hell, I've maybe met a couple of them in person once or twice, but that's about it. I don't know if they would have given any sort of preference to people they knew. Frankly, though, I don't have any problem with them doing exactly that.

It's like you implied in your second criteria above: if you know someone's strengths or weaknesses personally, you're in a better position to make a good judgment about their possible presentations. They'd be stupid not to apply that knowledge and lean towards presentations from skilled people they know over strangers with iffy submissions.

And I seriously doubt any of the people making the call would give preference to someone they knew if their submission sucked. They have their own reputations to consider, too, and they know that a shitty presentation will reflect badly on their selection committee.

Those two passages contradict each other. How can you say you have an "irrevocable, perpetual" license, then go on to claim that the "license granted will automatically expire?" Seems to me that an "irrevocable, perpetual" license, by definition, couldn't expire.

Despite the lack of booze, I'm excited. I just hope the people there who were new to blogging and WordPress weren't too turned off by all the policy/planning talk in this initial meeting.