Yeah, Scio11 seems to have some secret Enron/Arthur Anderson-esque formula for inclusion.  Maybe next year they can do it bigger and get more people in, it seems they are reaching critical mass.  That's a damn good article by the way.  How's the paper-free experiment still going?

Jade, I put myself on the waitlist the same day registration opened/closed. I never heard back.

IIRC, it asked me if I blogged (and where) but I did not divulge that information. Firstly, because I didn't think it should make a difference as to whether I received admittance to the conference or not. Secondly, because I figured if the conference was about promoting online science they'd want scientists who may not necessarily use the medium present to learn and provide input. Third, they made no mention that being a blogger would enhance ones chances of getting picked off the waitlist to attend the conference.

Two things:

*I don't even blog, and I got in. I was fairly quick off the mark (at ~40 minutes post-registration opening, if I recall correctly). So it's not only *not* just about being a blogger in a certain place, I don't think it's about being a blogger at all. Although there were very few of us there who didn't blog.

*It's moving and will be bigger next year, so at least there is that.

That said, it's possible that some things weren't strictly first come first serve, I can't prove otherwise. In which case, as soon as there is a wiki available for #scio12, get yourself paired up with some successful session organizers and propose some sessions and get people excited! Then, if they do make any exceptions, they will make them for you.

Brian, maybe its just changing venues?

I think it was a venue change; it will not be SigmaXi, but maybe one of the university settings. I did check with Bora at the end of the meeting, and he said it would be bigger next year.

Brian, 55 degrees F in January IS warm and sunny, by any rational non-spoiled rotten floridian/californian standard :-P

Becca- when you registered, did you give your twitter name also or mention on the application what your affliation with the blogging community was?  Were you accepted pretty quickly after applying or did you have to wait to get a response?

Yes, I think so. In Brian's summation on SCIO11, you are described as " everyone's favorite blog commenter".  I think you are well known in the blogging community for sure.

http://www.labspaces.net/blog/1117/_Scio____Collaborative_tools_in_industry_and_academia

LOL- No I don't think so.  You are everyone's favorite blog commenter.

 Why did you give your twitter handle then? You knew the organizers would recognize you if you did, right?  Was it because you wanted them to know that you aren't just a random applicant but someone with interest in science online and someone who gives a lot of input on a daily basis to a lot of writers?

Maybe it was first-come first-serve, but maybe it was also a little bit who you are and what you bring to science online. And if you didn't have a reputation in the community, you received a lower ranking on the wait list. I don't know. Probably not, but, the fact that TJ did not list his blog, and so appeared to be a random applicant, and didn't get in when he applied on the same day as you... seems like there may have been bias.

Becca, thanks for responding. So you applied 7 minutes into registering (registration IIRC started at noon EST) and was number 142 on the list. Extrapolating, means that gave people roughly 15 minutes to fill the roughly 300 slots available. I guess everyone from Scientopia was using autocomplete and waiting at their desks. ;)

As for me, my waitlist confirmation was received a couple hours after that (I was in a meeting).

I doubt I'll ever get an answer one way or another as to how the waitlist attendees were chosen. It is nice to see that perhaps a bigger venue will be chosen next year. Actually, if they had asked ... I know people who book events at the RBC center in Raleigh, NC.

TJ, here are the stats on Scio11 participants.

http://scienceonline2011.com/2011/01/stats-about-our-attendees/

Apparently almost half of them participated in some form in a session.  That seems a little too insular.  Hopefully next year they can bring in more outsiders or else Scio runs the risk of just being a glorified circle-jerk.

GR: Saw the stats and it doesn't tell me much. Figure 2 is "multiple choice" so it adds up to way past 300. Can't tell diddly from it.  I agree with you about the circle-jerk. Either the conference expands, or it truly is a clique.

BTW: Still going strong on the Electronic Office. I had to print out life insurance forms (figured I'm going to die someday, so someone should profit off of it), but that's because a hard copy needs to be mailed out. Otherwise, I have yet to print out anything longer than 3 pages in length, and no trees have been harmed yet this year for my manuscript reading.

Which makes me wonder ... what criteria do they use to pull people off that waitlist? I doubt it's solely "first on, first invited".