Francis Cianfrocca wrote:
> Regarding presentations: Selecting papers for a conference is basically 
> a referee-ing task. If there were 73 papers, perhaps more than 16 of 
> them actually were interesting. It's great to see the presenter in the 
> flesh and ask questions, but the Ruby world is growing beyond what one 
> small annual conference can serve.
> 
> It can be just as useful to read papers that are not only well-selected, 
> but *well-written* and *well-edited.* (I've always thought of Jon Postel 
> as one of the greatest unsung heroes of the Internet because of his 
> exceptional editing of the RFCs- almost all of the ones published up to 
> his death are at least a pleasure to read.)
> 
> What about a peer-reviewed, or at least refereed site for posters, 
> abstracts, and papers? Putting up perhaps 16 per month might be more 
> useful than what we have now. I'd contribute the bandwidth.
> 

Ruby Code & Style would be extremely interested in articles developed 
from non-accepted RubyConf proposals:

http://www.artima.com/rubycs
http://www.artima.com/rubycs/about.html


If you do not think  you can provide a full article, please contact me 
anyway and tell what you think you might want to publish. It would be 
quite interesting to assemble a collection of abstracts and posters or 
whatever we can arrange.

james DOT britt {at} gmail DOT com

-- 
James Britt
Editor-in-Chief, Ruby Code & Style