[dual_dingo]

Maybe it's my experience from working in grant driven academia, but applying for a grant 4 months before you need the money and then complaining because it took three short months to get a decision is ridiculous. Applying later than a year in advance is too late.

[biorach]

This is not grant driven acedemia. This is the PSF, not encumbered with layers of beurocracy, audits and regulation. An expectation of a turn round time of a few weeks is entirely reasonable

[dual_dingo]

Apparently, the two decision making bodies in the PSF for this matter have once-a-month meetings. This means any problem or missing information or whatever will delay the process for at least a month. So, maybe not a year, but 6-9 months would be a comfortable timeframe. I stand by it: 4 months before the event is WAY too late, and even with a slim organization, 3 months to get a decision is an absolutely reasonable time.

[gangstead]

At Strange Loop this year during the keynote the organizer said he was usually signing the contract for the hosting venue 2 years in advance. I'm not saying a first year 200 person conference has to plan as far out as an established X,000 person conference, but 4 months out is cutting it close. I'd suspect all first year conferences are very chaotic as the organizers learn to go from 0 to 1 so good for them for pulling it off.

It's time to start working on next year's conference and grant proposal.

[Beached]

this was my first reaction. how fast they came to a consensus, it was the organizers fault for applying so late, it the boards fault for approving in only 3 months. 1 year prior to the con is more what I would expect.