PASI 2012: rotten tomatoes?

The discussion began with a complaint about a theory slide from yesterday's talks: an equation with 24 terms? why on earth put it there and dedicate 6 seconds to explain it? Are our standards for presentations so achanchados that we tolerate such persistent background of bad talks? How much do we value properly communicating our good science at a conference?

We were just a sample of the young scientists in the conference happily chatting over some half finished dishes of camarao. We let our imagination fly and set to change the world, and the PASI 201X slowly took shape.

The first idea was to have a second projector showing live tweeter comments from the audience. I liked it even if I despise tweeter. Of course, a big loud buzz going off when time is over is essential, just to show the speaker who is in charge. And what if we give 'clickers' to the audience and poll them as the talk goes on? A trap door in the stage would open when the approval rating reaches the level of Italian politicians, sending a surprised speaker into a swimming pool. Maybe we should just give the audience control of advancing the slides. They could decide to halt the presentation in those absurdly complicated slides until the speaker has gone through the torture of explaining every detail. Clickers and technology are out there, power to the people!

Shall we replace session chairs, and their fluctuating skills, with a panel of multidisciplinary experts with the authoritative and intimidatory powers of a thesis defense committee, or of supreme court judges? They would be able to exert enough force to keep even the most reputable figures of our community on track, and discussing topics interesting to the bulk of the audience.

The draft of the plan, which might or might not involve some sort of "last physicist standing" element, is now on the hands of Meredith. I can not reveal more details so as not to interfere with the grant writing process, but we only have to finalize a few things here and there. For example, do we apply to the NSF, or to the Discovery Channel? They need a show to replace the aging MythBusters!

PS: today Ed Brown showed us the way speakers can strike back: Quizes.