In total we have had 73 people give feedback

Scientific Quality Excellent 8.22% Very Good 38.36% Good 45.21% Satisfactory 8.22% Unsatisfactory 0%	Scope Too Wide 5.48% Just Right 84.93% Too Narrow 5.48% Don't Know 4.11%	Community Too Open 4.11% Just Right 67.12% Too Closed 15.07% Don't Know 13.7%	Program Commitee? Yes 39.73% No 41.1% Don't Know 17.81%
Longer Meeting? Yes 23.29% No 57.53% Don't Know 19.18%	Parallel Sessions? Yes 31.51% No 60.27% Don't Know 8.22%	Long and Short Talks? Yes 32.88% No 50.68% Don't Know 16.44%	Excursion? Yes 57.53% No 24.66% Don't Know 16.44%
Reasonable Fee? Yes 54.79% No 17.81% Don't Know 27.4%	Organisation Excellent 19.18% Very Good 39.73% Good 30.14% Satisfactory 10.96% Unsatisfactory 0%

longer coffee breaks! it is important to have "informal" time for discussions

Internet connexion is very bad and should be available in the rooms rather than in the lecture room! I would prefer every speaker gets 25 minutes talk and some 10mn talks available.

the semantics of "Everyone gets 10 minutes some 25 minute talks availabe" is not clear to me

Bad network access Too stuffed schedule

Network

10mn talks are useless to me, I got nothing from most of them. We should guarantee only the right to speak every other year. Organising more small thematic winter workshops could also be a way to redirect very technical talks to a more restricted audience.

A wonderful meeting with entusiastic and friendly atmosphere!

no parallel sections

WiFi in the rooms



There are too many contributions. Why not having a programe comitee for a "small" conference/wotkshop and in parallel to this conference, organize informal sessions on more specific topics.

I am not opposed to short talks, but 10 min is too short. I would not mind a 4.5 day meeting instead of 3.5 days. The organization was good, but you should really make it clear to the Wifi connection provider that their service was below any standard. The food was great both at the university canteen and at the restaurant (Thu).

Everything was excellent, except the internet connection !

The chocolate tarts were great!!!

Organization was very good, wifi was terrible. Maybe Bengt suggestion for the distribution of time among sites works.

I loved combining TFP with TYPES!

Internet in rooms

I'm not part of the TYPES project so take the replies with a pinch of salt. With regards to the large number of talks I agree with the hints in this questionnaire that something has to be done..the ten minutes talks were crazy even with the preloaded slides to avoid laptop swapping. As far as I am concerned the organisation was impeccable. Thanks, Laszlo

A good well-organised conference (albeit with wireless problems)

Great work organizing the conference! Much appreciated.

The short presentation sessions were very convenient in my opinion. The scheme gave an excellent overview of current activities in the Types network, without getting too tiring by long talks bulging with technical details. I found this quite all right and would prefer to see this implemented again in future meetings.

network connection was bad.

I like the suggestion that each site gets a certain number of talks based on their activity in the project.

I would support a loose PC too. What I mean by loose is something where enough room is left for unusual things, even if they are less polished than usual.

Excellent job done.

Nice meeting. Fee a little high but I agree it is unavoidable in the setting. Pitty the internet was "poor", but I guess these are the hazards of free enterprise. Thanks !

I support Bengt's suggestion for allocating talks in the next TYPES annual meeting.

Little availability of network connection made the event stressful. A excursion would have been needed after half of the meeting to recharge. Food was nice (cakes!).

Problems with internet access amd weak air conditioning.

I think it is better if the location is close to some attractions.

_-http://sneezy.cs.nott.ac.uk/types/results.phpYtext/html&DVe{���
�