Since WOPR is modeled on LAWST, I would like to know more about LAWST. Where do I go for information?
Can our company play host; supply a meeting room, refreshments, copying facilities etc. at no charge?
Absolutely! Please contact the organizers.
What relationships does WOPR have with hosting organizations, test tool vendors, consultants and training organizations, and vendors of software, hardware and telecom services? Do some vendors receive preferential treatment? Is there any conflict of interest or potential for it? Is there any influence peddling?
Response:
WOPR is entirely independent of these vendor organizations, though we do gratefully accept donations in the forms of money, the use of meeting facilities and supplies, computer equipment and software, subsidized refreshments, and the time of volunteers. The organizers of WOPR are all unpaid volunteers who pay their own travel and lodging expenses. There are no conflicts of interest. TOP
Will there be some sort of a 'resolution paper' coming from a workshop session that you'd be willing to share with the performance and reliability community in general?
Response:
Probably not. The first several LAWSTs had a group position paper as an end deliverable of a session, but there were often wrangles and abstentions. These days it is more common for individuals and small teams to publish papers based on the workshop session on their own initiative, if they choose. TOP
Something about the idea of submitting papers seems wrong for some reason. Seems too much like a regular conference, and the most value I get from conferences is what happens in between the regular track sessions.
Response:
Before submitted papers were a part of these workshop sessions, the groups simply convened and tackled the subject at hand. Most people like the prepared papers and want to continue with them. The intent is to (1) have everyone better prepare by writing – or at least outlining – a paper and reading all the other papers prior to a session, and (2) frankly to filter out the idly curious. These people are not unwelcome, but especially when they dilute the discussion or occupy limited seats then their attendance does not have high priority. The idea is to have brief position papers or longer, more developed papers to help each of us lead a group-wide discussion. In the most recent LAWST workshop session, several papers were only one or two pages long, and the longest was about 25 pages. The flavor is different than traditional conferences, with mostly one-way communication to a large group. These workshop sessions are more like small group peer reviews with lots of impromptu brainstorming. TOP
Is having a scribe that important here? Does the scribe miss out on a lot of the action? What happens to the notes? What if some sensitive information, such as the name of a firm that the presenter planned to keep anonymous, slips out inadvertently and is captured in the notes? Who can I distribute copies of the recorded minutes to?
Response:
The scribe is an important role, without which there is no record. In practice, several people who are agile typists take notes voluntarily on their own laptops as a supplement, and later share them, but a scribe is still needed. The scribe probably misses less and retains more than others, because he or she has to be alert. If you plan to attend, would you like to volunteer to be the scribe or recorder? If you are not sure what this entails, please contact us and we will fill you in. Every participant gets a full copy of the notes and may use them without restriction, provided attribution is given to the other participants. Requests to expunge sensitive information from the record are generally honored, but the onus is on the individual to discipline his or her statements in the first place. The recorded minutes should not be circulated outside the WOPR community (workshop session participants and prior participants). TOP
If the workshop session had a highly focused theme, that reduces the chance that I'd be interested in any particular one.
Response:
If we set too broad a target, like performance testing and engineering, the workshop session will be scattered and without focus. If we set it too narrow, specialized and esoteric, nobody will come. How many would want to attend for three days, for example, if the topic is the time required to convert EBCDIC files to ASCII ones on an IBM 370/165 mainframe running MVS? (That was once a big topic.) We'll aim for the middle ground with interesting, timely, usable-on-the-job topics. TOP
What product and services description literature are vendor employees allowed to bring, if any? Can vendors make sales pitches? Is it OK or vendor people to distribute their business cards and/or e-mail addresses?
Response:
These workshop sessions are neutral territory, not an overt sales opportunity. Anybody trying to use a WOPR session as a vehicle to sell let's say testing tools will be summarily removed. We will have a side table where people can place product literature and copies of papers they want to share. There are no restrictions on what you place on the table, beyond the bounds of good taste. In practice, several people usually bring and generously share copies of published or unpublished papers on the topic or of general background interest, in a totally non-commercial way. Do bring yours, if you have any. People are free to network to their heart's content, trade business cards and e-mail addresses. This level of activity is the limit, however, in terms of allowable sales and marketing activities. TOP
As a potential participant, should I be concerned about sharing secrets with competitors?
Response:
Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and their like will not be used in the workshop sessions, and this restriction does not seem to cramp the dialog. Nothing should be written in a paper or expressed verbally which might violate an NDA. In the workshop sessions I have attended, I have never seen this as a significant issue. TOP
What is the likely mix of participants?
Response:
We want a reasonably diverse group, in terms of the industries represented and types of projects. For the first WOPR session, we have indications of interest from people at IBM, HP, Sun, Dell, Microsoft and Cisco, just to mention the large vendors. A few small vendors and startups probably will be represented, including tool vendors -- their firms make tools for performance and robustness testing. In all, about 35% of the people expressing interest work for vendors. Approximately another 35% work for enterprises like multinational banks, insurance companies, health care organizations, retailers, the military and government agencies. The remainder (another 30%) is mostly consultants. TOP
How do we get the word out?
Response:
Though there is a possibility we will be over-subscribed, we would still appreciate you mentioning this workshop to people who you think would make good participants, or sending us their e-mail addresses. TOP
What topics already have been scheduled for sessions?
Response:
The topic for WOPR1 was “Realism in Performance Testing”, WOPR2 was “Where Performance testing made a difference (or failed to make an anticipated one).” and WOPR3 is “Experiences with Performance Testing Tools.” TOP
Why three days, not more or less?
Response:
We have set the length of a WOPR workshop, at least initially, at three days. The “sweet spot” of productive time spent in fruitful discussion and brainstorming is much better with three days than with a two-day session. And three days is an upper limit because most people prefer not to be away for more than three days. TOP
Why not have sessions on weekends?
Response:
Based on an earlier poll of preferences, the organizers determined that the best time to hold the conference was the Thursday through Saturday model. TOP
What considerations go into choosing the date?
Response:
The dates are selected so as to not conflict with major holidays (e.g., Labor Day) or major conferences (e.g., STAR, PNSQC, CMG). TOP
I am already traveling to the STAR conference. Can we coordinate WOPR so that I need to make only one trip for both?
Response:
The first WOPR workshop will not be scheduled in coordination with and adjacent to a major conference. Another private, invitation-only workshop is STMR (the software test managers' roundtable), which for example was scheduled for the weekend before STAR East in Orlando in May, 2003. This coordination with STAR has two advantages: (a) half of the STMR participants attended STAR and so had to travel to Orlando anyway, and (b) SQE, the conference managers, donated a meeting room and refreshments for STMR. The same offer of facilities from SQE and other conference sponsors is open for WOPR. However, at this time the organizers do not see a significant advantage to this. TOP
Why don’t we have a WOPR session in my hometown?
Response:
In earlier informal data-gathering about preferred geographic locations for WOPR workshops, the most popular choice has been "my home town" -- but we all live in different towns. Several people are under travel restrictions -- their companies will not pay for non-essential travel at this time, so the discount fares to major cities are probably easier to justify. TOP
Nobody else has to travel as far as I do, do they?
Response:
So far the longest-distance-willing-to-travel award, among people who have expressed a serious interest in attending WOPR, is a toss-up between a fellow in India and another in Australia. We actually had attendees from the UK and New Zealand. TOP
I may not be able to attend the first couple of sessions, but I would like to know about the interpersonal dynamics in the meeting. Where can I get more information?
Response:
See the book by Sam Kaner et al, entitled: “Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision Making”, published in 1996 by New Society Publishers. TOP
How do I keep in touch?
Response:
Register via the member signup, and we will place you on the mailing list. TOP
What are the backgrounds of the WOPR organizers and advisors?
Response:
See the page dedicated to the organizers. TOP
FAQ
