[nycbug-talk] Conference Topics Thread

[Brad Schonhorst]

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