I used to co-host the San Diego chapter of Papers We Love[2], and here's my secret sauce: I offered to meet with every presenter in advance for a dry run of their presentation. Probably two thirds of the presenters took me up on the offer.
For the group and the presenter, going through a dry run had the positive impact you would expect on presentation quality.
The benefit for me was that I got one-on-one discussion/learning with a wide variety of people passionate about a broad range of papers, and I also got to go through the material twice. So I learned much more and retained it better.
[2] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYPNnoVAQqb2Mue9v9f2euA
[1] https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=vdMOvmIAAAAJ [2] https://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol18/p3923-eslami.pdf
Thanks for sharing your experience.
How do you suss out peoples technical aptitude, and what was the minimum level you were looking for?
How were your discussions structured?
BTW heard about this paper[1] a few weeks ago, but not completely aligned with database and probably a bit too introductory for your group.
[1]https://www.cs.fsu.edu/~awang/courses/cop5611_s2024/vnode.pd...
Appreciate the paper link! We like going back to the basics sometimes, so I'll definitely take a look.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Bernstein
[2] https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=9eNQbZUAAAAJ&hl=en
[1] https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-01761-2