No announcement yet.

Re: ISB'93

This topic is closed.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: ISB'93

    Fred Yeadon wrote:

    >expected to apply this year. In other words abstracts probably have a 99%
    >chance of acceptance. But this is only my view of the world.

    One additional piece of information may be useful. This year
    more than 800 abstracts were submitted, which is about twice as
    many as expected. This partly explains the delays. It also may
    mean that more abstracts are rejected or moved to poster
    sessions. But this should apply mostly to those who submitted
    multiple abstracts. There's probably no reason to worry; as Fred
    said, more delegates means more revenue.

    Limiting the number of slides does not sound like a good idea.
    Even without limitations, I have seen many examples of people
    trying to cram too much information on one slide. This slide
    limitation policy may present a welcome challenge to the same
    people, and they may "boldly go where no presenter has gone
    before". I will bring my binoculars, just in case.

    Like Fred and Giovanni, I prefer being responsible for the
    typesetting and formatting of my abstracts.

    Maybe we should stop this ISB-bashing. It may relieve
    frustration, but the organizers are not subscribing to Biomch-L.
    It is better to approach them directly with some constructive

    -- Ton van den Bogert
    Human Performance Laboratory
    University of Calgary, Canada
    (who is still waiting for abstract acceptance from ISB'93)