Well hello again.

It has been a while since we did a chat event, and I think we should do another one soon. We now have a community calendar which this and other events can be entered into, so, for this chat meeting I propose we discuss:

  • What events we want to put in our calendar? Conferences, speaches, anything of note that is relevant to cryptographers (and ideally organised around our community).
  • What we thought of the recent evalutation: Cryptography self-evaluation: how ARE you doing? and any improvements/initiatives we should take.
  • Feedback for moderators - perhaps part of the above - are we "getting it right" do we feel?
  • Any other relevant topics.

I propose we aim for a date late in June. This is mostly me being selfish, because I'm very busy until then, but also because I want to give a good clear amount of time to put the event in the calendar, too (however, if somebody wants to run the event earlier, do feel free to take it off my hands!).

With that in mind, I would like to know what points people wish to discuss, and any dates/times that a large percentage of us might not be able to do (e.g. because of conferences).


1 Answer 1


I'm sure the mods know about this, but for those who don't: A helpful page on the topic of self-evaluation is the Area 51 beta page for Crypto SE which keeps a few stats for this site and compares it to the "ideal" for a graduated site. Topics like total answers per question, daily traffic, etc, might be relevant for the chat.

  • $\begingroup$ I can see ways to get more questions from some regulars of sci.crypt or a few other newsgroup or mailing lists, but I fear the ratio of quality questions would drop, and I think I fear that more than remaining in beta for eons. $\endgroup$
    – fgrieu Mod
    Commented May 26, 2012 at 8:37
  • $\begingroup$ @fgrieu: We're already getting some pretty good questions that remain unanswered, presumably because the intersection of "users who know the answer" and "users who are currently active" is empty. So I'd be in favor of more participation, even if it means lowering the level of questions a bit. We can always just close the questions that are actually bad, as opposed to merely easy. Easy is good, at least as long as we're also careful about spotting and closing duplicates. $\endgroup$ Commented May 27, 2012 at 19:13

You must log in to answer this question.