Yes, I was there!! It was a great event and an exciting experience. And it does work!
I made a lot of photographs to document the historical moment. I will look it through next days and create a photostory in a powerpointfile or so. Everybody who likes may download it from my homepage. I will announce it to you all, when it's ready. It is only a pity, that a camera can hardly catch the impression of the masses in the huge tent: around 2.700m² of space and the people sitting on cushions round the middle. It looked like at a tennis center court. (And there was a second, smaller tent nearby, for the catering supply and some of the working groups.) Now it is over and time for reflection and further learning is coming: It is great, that we proved, that it works with really a crowd. Actually it was a simple OS application - finishing day in a 4-days congress. But to be true, there are a lot of questions uprising to be answered. And all questions come along with the complexity, which is created by the huge number of people Here are some of them: * There was no need for a marketplace with real dealing. Imagine a bulletin line with 230 topics on, of approximately 200m lenght in three sections (one for each working session) along three walls. Quiet a work only to walk it up. It' s ok, if you are only looking for a nice party to talk, but if you want to overview a lot of topics of serious meaning for the system, it is not that easy. And how to make deals within this distances? * Mass psychology and time structure: At one hand people need more time to keep orientated what's going - and doing all the marches (Hard work for bumblebees). This means, you need some extratime between the timeslots of the working sessions. At the other hand someone can feel damned lonesome, if your are lost in a crowd of 2000 and there is nothing really going on. At the end of a congress people may avoid unpleasuring feelings simple by leaving (and many dropped off). I don't have any ideas how to handle that at the moment, but may be it is not a problem at all. * Reports: Michaels way of giving out report sheets for handwriting on a clipboard to every group worked very well. But if you want to support 60 people each working session to write reports in an IT-system, you need a lot of technical stuff. And it needs a lot of reading time, too. * Visualizing: There were no flipcharts (or pinboards). That was fine, because you had an unlimited view from one end to the other. If you would like to support peoples work to come to pleasuring outcomes, visualization is very helpful. This probably means you need even more space and may be a different concept of structuring the hall. * There was no need for a convergence. Folks conveined to topics of there passions (and some of them where really strange) and everybody participating in a session, picked out experiences for his own individual benefit. But how to converge 180 reports in a appropriate way? Maybe we need adapted structuring ideas for procedures. Not to mention the masses of paper to copy the book (round 400.000 sheets). The electronic voting system helps a lot, anyway you need a huge technical supply. It was a great event and at the same time it opens up an enormous field of new learnings and experiences needed. Let's do it.. Erich from lovely Vienna * * ========================================================== [email protected] ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of [email protected], Visit: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
