You can't really have a meaningful community vote on conference proposals when there are >100 of them. People cannot realistically process and vote meaningfully on that scale.
I appreciate the democratic spirit of it, but no one is going to give full consideration to the 100th proposal they're reading
One alternative would be to have voters pick the conference theme/track they're interested in, and vote on the proposals in that area of interest
As a bonus, they're likely to pick themes/tracks they're personally knowledgeable about
@mark that's how VALA does peer review: you pick what themes you're knowledgeable about/interested in and then get a small number of papers to review from that track.
@hugh seems sensible! do people like it?
@mark actually the biggest problem is that most people think they're not knowledgeable enough to be peer reviewers! Seems to work pretty well. Mostly people would get 2 or 3 each to look at, with 2 reviewers per paper and Conference Chairs deal with any tiebreakers or conflicting reviews.
@hugh I voted on a list with ~150 choices today. It felt a bit ridiculous
This is a tiny instance.