Let's say we are expecting an average of 500 people to come during the 3 core days. You proposal implies all this people will be tight to a single agenda and a single location from Monday to Wednesday. The room should be big (this is not a problem, we'll have it) but this implies that one-->many wil be the default setup since many-->many is really complex to deal wit in big spaces. Well, I have never attended an event like this. Also, if this is the plan I don't see why have we struggled so much with the room requirements. I think it is good to split people in different rooms, working on a good coverage and publishing of what's going on in all the sessions. This allows any session to have a more focused and more reduced audience, the essential ingredients to open the door to many -> many games. Also we need to assume that precisely the people subscribed to this is list has the most wide cross-discipline interests. If we are going to get a +200 audience we should expect to receive people interested actually in only some topics, being really bored with the rest. Even inside the core community we could find such profiles. Even myself ;) got bored in some sessions in Stuttgart, not because of the session itself but because of my knowledge/interest in the topic. In Stuttgart I couod say it was my fault for choosing a talk not appropriate for me, but if in Vilanova the organisation has decided I should be in this session and only in this session... I imagine I may get upset easily. En/na Glynn Foster ha escrit: > Hey, > > What I'd love to see is a *single* track for both the User, Client and > Developer days, then multiple tracks for the brainstorming/developer > days before and after. > > If we can be good about our choice of talks I think we can maximize our > audience rather than splitting things across too many rooms. -- Quim Gil - http://desdeamericaconamor.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature