Comments on: Conference Experience Evolution and The Paradox of Choice

By: Climb to the Stars (Stephanie Booth) » End-Of-Travel Musings

Climb to the Stars (Stephanie Booth) » End-Of-Travel Musings — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:45:01 +0000

[...] As I mentioned, the solution I found to survive SXSW without burning out was to keep a low profile and go with the flow. I kept that up somewhat in San Francisco: not too many plans, low expectations on what I wanted to accomplish, no frantic blogging/photographing/visiting/videoing. Some people think it’s a shame, but I don’t. [...]

By: Stephanie

Stephanie — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:47:12 +0000

Howard: I've thought about that, and actually, iirc the second edition of LIFT was in that spirit. There were really long breaks, which was quite cool. With this kind of formula, I'd be a bit worried as the conference organiser that people would think they aren't getting their money's worth -- or that the programme isn't "juicy" enough for them to justify attending. So actually, I think it would be a very good solution, but I'm wondering if it's marketable and how people would react.

By: Howard Greenstein

Howard Greenstein — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:20:46 +0000

I completely get it. Sometimes managing people and new connections takes a lot of brain power. Plus, when you're a speaker and you've spent time prepping to speak, after your panel you are still pretty wound up and flocks of people want to trade business cards. I find I can't even write on their cards what the follow up is, if there are too many people. So, perhaps a strategy for a future conference you create is: More time between panels/events specifically for networking, with a 'slow and time to talk' theme?

By: Stephanie

Stephanie — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:47:12 +0000

Howard: I’ve thought about that, and actually, iirc the second edition of LIFT was in that spirit. There were really long breaks, which was quite cool. With this kind of formula, I’d be a bit worried as the conference organiser that people would think they aren’t getting their money’s worth — or that the programme isn’t “juicy” enough for them to justify attending. So actually, I think it would be a very good solution, but I’m wondering if it’s marketable and how people would react.

By: Howard Greenstein

Howard Greenstein — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 16:20:46 +0000

I completely get it. Sometimes managing people and new connections takes a lot of brain power. Plus, when you’re a speaker and you’ve spent time prepping to speak, after your panel you are still pretty wound up and flocks of people want to trade business cards. I find I can’t even write on their cards what the follow up is, if there are too many people. So, perhaps a strategy for a future conference you create is: More time between panels/events specifically for networking, with a ‘slow and time to talk’ theme?

By: steph

steph — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 05:58:42 +0000

I apologised profusely for walking past people because it does get overwhelming even for someone who's good with faces, and quite often I've apologised to other folks if I had previous lunch/dinner plans – it's not because I don't want to spend time with them, but more that I already scheduled something else – I think the protocol is well understood.

I believe how you deal with the information+social overload depends on what you want to get out of a conference. At SXSW, I was simply interested in spending time with people. If I go to a panel it's only because it's an issue I care strongly about (and don't already know much about) – or if I'm going to act upon it some time throughout the year. [As a result, for most of the panels I chose to go to this year, I usually only recognised one or two faces.]

And I treat panels rather like how I take reading a book, reading a newspaper article or listening to a podcast – some things are worth remembering, most things are not. I tend to note things I want to remember later, and am okay about forgetting the less important things. After all, that's what memory's for – filtering out what's not important

By: steph

steph — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:58:42 +0000

I apologised profusely for walking past people because it does get overwhelming even for someone who’s good with faces, and quite often I’ve apologised to other folks if I had previous lunch/dinner plans – it’s not because I don’t want to spend time with them, but more that I already scheduled something else – I think the protocol is well understood.

I believe how you deal with the information+social overload depends on what you want to get out of a conference. At SXSW, I was simply interested in spending time with people. If I go to a panel it’s only because it’s an issue I care strongly about (and don’t already know much about) – or if I’m going to act upon it some time throughout the year. [As a result, for most of the panels I chose to go to this year, I usually only recognised one or two faces.]

And I treat panels rather like how I take reading a book, reading a newspaper article or listening to a podcast – some things are worth remembering, most things are not. I tend to note things I want to remember later, and am okay about forgetting the less important things. After all, that’s what memory’s for – filtering out what’s not important

By: Going Solo: an Intimate Conference « Going Solo

Going Solo: an Intimate Conference « Going Solo — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:02:00 +0000

[...] Solo: an Intimate Conference Posted March 14, 2008 I posted some thoughts about attending conferences over on Climb to the Stars, now that the madness of SXSW is over. Writing this post has brought me [...]