On Thursday, 4 October 2018 at 07:12:03 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
On Wed, 2018-10-03 at 18:46 +0000, Joakim via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[…]
I don't doubt that some are like you and prefer viewing live,
but given how conferences keep dying off and online tech talks
are booming, you're in an extreme minority that prefers that
high-cost live version. That means the market inevitably stops
catering to you, which is why the talk-driven conference
format is dying off.
And new conferences keep being started and being successful.
And many just keep on going, often getting more and more
successful.
Your personal view of conferences cannot be stated as global
truth, since it patently is not fact, and evidence indicates
not true, it is just your opinion.
The link in my OP links to a guy who maintained a spreadsheet of
Apple-related conferences as evidence. He lists several that went
away and says nothing replaced them. If you don't even examine
the evidence provided, I'm not sure why we should care about your
opinions.
On Thursday, 4 October 2018 at 07:53:54 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 October 2018 at 16:17:48 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 October 2018 at 01:28:37 UTC, Adam Wilson
wrote:
On 10/2/18 4:34 AM, Joakim wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2018 at 09:39:14 UTC, Adam Wilson
wrote:
[...]
It is not clear what you disagree with, since almost nothing
you say has any bearing on my original post. To summarize, I
suggest changing the currently talk-driven DConf format to
either
1. a more decentralized collection of meetups all over the
world, where most of the talks are pre-recorded, and the
focus is more on introducing new users to the language or
2. at least ditching most of the talks at a DConf still held
at a central location, maybe keeping only a couple panel
discussions that benefit from an audience to ask questions,
and spending most of the time like the hackathon at the last
DConf, ie actually meeting in person.
This point has a subtle flaw. Many of the talks raise points
of discussion that would otherwise go without discussion, and
potentially unnoticed, if it were not for the person bringing
it up. The talks routinely serve as a launchpad for the
nightly dinner sessions. Benjamin Thauts 2016 talk about
shared libraries is one such example. Indeed every single
year has brought at least one (but usually more) talk that
opened up some new line of investigation for the dinner
discussions.
I thought it was pretty obvious from my original post, since I
volunteered to help with the pre-recorded talks, but the idea
is to have pre-recorded talks no matter whether DConf is held
in a central location or not.
I went to a conference once where they had mixed live talks and
prerecorded talks - questions where taken at the end to the
speaker of the prerecorded talk via a sip call.
The organisers at the end admitted that the prerecorded talks
experiment failed. No one really paid attention to any of the
content in it.
Did anybody pay attention to the live talks either? ;) That's the
real comparison.
Anyway, the reason I'm giving to prerecord talks is so you can
watch them on your own time before the conference. Watching
prerecorded talks with everybody else at a conference is layering
stupid on top of stupid. :D
