From AwesomeWiki
Revision as of 17:35, 16 May 2013 by (talk) (Importance of being prepared)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


How hard could it possibly be to get 10 people with different backgrounds and strong personalities to agree? wikipedia propecia no rx - cheap propecia

visit here - google or yahoo

5iGgGy <a href="">uelluaykkokh</a>, [url=]ddeyuoqpwvos[/url], [link=]atohluuoqybb[/link],

Voting while socializing

Some people mix it up, drink and eat and discuss. 30 minutes of process, 2 hours of total time.

Some groups just plow through it, don't socialize.

Most of the parties are planned at the relaxed social time.

"reckless granters" - drunken toothfairy

Less distracting to meet in a conference room rather than a bar. Control over your environment. Gallery or hackerspace or somewhat.

Having deeper connections means the group is also stronger to further independent goals.

Bringing in prior favorites

Inviting nominees when the awesome is low.

Trying to have a system was cumbersome.

Things that were top ranking get carried forward.

Contact them before moving forward with it.

Engaging with hopefuls

Some people call

Some people come pitch. Use whatever format you like.

Important that they come and connect with us and each other. Then the trustees have access to awesome up and coming folk, too.

Do something that helps them stick in your brain.

List top three on blog, not just winner. Gives an endorsement of sorts.

Awesome hours as a way to help hopefuls give a good presentation (this is a debated topic)

Tag things with Awesome stickers.

Banner for sites if they like, link back to blog entry about their participation/win for legitimacy

Random Bits

Legality issues

Carry over list added back in

Not being overly attached to a thing. Don't have to discuss every single one.

Follow up after receiving a submission inviting them to party.