[nycbug-talk] Conference Topics Thread

[nikolai]

> On 6/20/06, michael <lists at genoverly.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:33:09 -0400
>> pete at nomadlogic.org (Pete Wright) wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 08:04:00AM -0500, Jeff Knight wrote:
>> > > Ya know, I've never been into the whole theme/track idea. At any
>> > > conference I go to, I just cherry pick from the list of sessions
>> > > that sound interesting to me irrespective of what track they are
>> > > in. Do people really pay any attention? Do the beancounters that
>> > > pay for the conferences think "well... I don't see a track with our
>> > > company's buzzword du jour, so I'm not releasing the funding for
>> > > that puppy"? And, since most conferences usually end up having to
>> > > pad their tracks with a number of sessions that don't really fit
>> > > anywhere, do tracks really do anything at all?
>> > >
>> >
>> > hey jeff, just a quick note.  it's considered bad form to top post to
>> > this (and most technical) lists.
>> >
>> >
>> > i think it's generally considered a good thing to have some form of
>> > coherency between talks.  sure we all tend to cherry pick between
>> > talks
>> > - especially at good conferences.  infact i'd say that's a sign of a
>> >   good conf.  i dont' see how having a theme could be considered a bad
>> > thing either...
>> >
>> > -p
>>
>> Pete, I agree that themes are a good thing.  And cherry picking is our
>> right [grin].  But I, like Jeff, always have a hard time when I want to
>> catch 2 presentations going on at the same time.  I'm not a fan of
>> concurrent tracks.
>>
>> Specifically for NYCBSDCon, what do others think?
>>
>
> I hate feeling like I am missing something by chosing to see one
> speaker.  On the other hand, its not much fun to sit through a talk
> you care nothing about because there is nothing else to do.
>
> -Brad

Hey, then we can go outside and have a smoke!
PLEASE, no concurrent tracks!
I won't be able to tape them :)
--
 nikolai