I think there are plenty of reasons to have another one.  For one how 
much has changed in just 9 months.  It has exploded...that and the 
fact is that you still need as human beings to connect with other 
people outside your "sphere" of influance.  

Personaly I would just like to meet other vloggers face to face....I 
have been doing this for a year now and still have not yet had the 
opportunity to meet anyone.  There is much to celebrate I think...

Heath
http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com

--- In [email protected], "schlomo rabinowitz" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think some of the stuff from the last vloggercon still is 
applicable today:
> 
> How tos
> Net Neutrality
> Digital Divide
> Get Togethers
> Distributed Collaboration
> Futurist Brainstorming Sessions
> Video Vertigo Summit
> Money Makin', Makin' Bacon
> ... and that's just off the top of my head.
> 
> I know you and Jay keep saying that you dont see a reason to have 
one
> yet, but I still disagree...and that's coming from someone who put a
> lot of work into the last one; I understand what an undertaking it 
is
> to create a two-day event (if it'll even be a two-day event next
> time).  There is much to discuss.  And even more to celebrate!
> 
> One thing I kept fighting against last time is how Yahoo-centric it
> was; today it will be much easier to bring in perspectives from all
> over the web.  From the youtubers to Corporate (like NPR and NYT)
> those who go it alone.  This is the main reason why I want to do it.
> I'm selfish:  I just want to talk to these other folks and all they
> need is a reason to come over.
> 
> Anyway, that's my two cents..
> 
> Schlomo
> http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> http://webshots.com/is/spotlight
> http://hatfactory.net
> http://evilvlog.com
> 
> 
> On 2/22/07, Michael Verdi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > What are people thinking they'd like do at another vloggercon 
aside from
> >  meet and hang out (which is a given!)? What developments in the 
last 9
> >  months do you want to see addressed? What wasn't addressed last 
time that
> >  should have been? Basically I'm trying to steer the conversation 
from when
> >  and where to why.
>


Reply via email to