RFE: talk tagging for cfp review

[kcbraunschweig]

It was mentioned somewhere else, what if reviewers could apply tags to talk submissions and then use tags as a way to annotate groups of talks for consideration e.g.

• tag talks that might be dupes of each other so you remember to compare
• tag talks that might be good to change tracks

this might be a somewhat simpler way to address #222 ? not sure

this also came from a suggestion from 2016 so maybe we just don't care anymore

cc @jaymzh @jberkus

[jberkus]

I think it could be a temporary workaround instead of #222, since we're unlikely to do that this year. But it doesn't sub for it.

If reviewers could tag things, here's some other tags i would want:

• needs clarification: for speakers where someone needs to contact them and ask about certain details (like, if they have helpers for a workshop)
• needs rewrite: for otherwise good proposals with bad wording -- so that they don't go into the catalog that way
• red flag: for speakers who have a substantial problem which might disqualify them, such as: being flaky, having done bait-and-switch before, needing major travel funds, etc.

All of the above would need a reviewer comment to explain the exact needs, of course. But the flags would help track leads and KC not miss critical comments.