hmm. so basically you're recommending we should all just go to the pub and have a bit of a yarn. Mmm. It's got my vote. <ducks> But seriously, does the concept of planning the unplanned really work? The value of hallway conversations is surely not physicality of it but the spontaneity of it. They just sorta happen. <Thinking out loud now> - maybe it's also the passion of an issue that causes individuals to have a real conversation with someone who may be a stranger that makes it so appealing and rewarding. I figure leave 50% of the conference to hallway/pub/accidental learning and 50% of the conference to presented/structured learning. So basically the way it is, is good for me. Cool thoughts though Lin. jamie

...

...

Lin Nah 11/9/2003 5:17:22 PM >>>

On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Tony McGregor wrote:

...

There's nothing magical about an hour. Volunteers to do other things are welcomed.

I personally think an hour is way too long for a standard talk. Most conferences seem to go for 25min + 5m questions and change over. Well it is probably better to split the day into 35 min slots (or 30 min slots but that means 20min + 5min questions + 5 min changeover). If someone wants more time they take up 2 slots or 3 slots .

I really like the idea of a session of rapid fire short talks. Some conferences have an "outrageous opinions" session structured like that. We could have a session of 5-10 min anything goes talks. Give an idea, an experience, a spoof, anything you want the audience to hear. The only rules being sit down after 10 min and wear the flak for anything you say yourself.

Actually I came across the concept of "Open Space" when reading a blog entry by Bruce Eckel. http://mindview.net/WebLog/log-0004 says "One of the new features here at the conference is "Open Space" which I was initially skeptical about but which seems to be working astoundingly well. The room where the keynote talks are being held has boards where you can post a topic for a time slot. The original idea was a talk at the front of the room and one at the back, but it seems that tables have been taken over for individual discussions and as a result there are already more discussions than two at any one time. The goal was to foster the "hallway conversation" events that are often the best experiences that people have at a conference, by providing nuclei of interests for such conversations through focused topics. I'm particularly interested to see how the open space continues to develop, as it may be one of the most interesting variations in this conference. It already makes the conference more interesting and interactive than the ones we have had in the past. " I had a look into the concept and found it isn't that unknown. The following links have more info about it: http://www.co-intelligence.org/P-Openspace.html http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_space_conference I am not suggesting using "Open space" throughout the entire meet. However I wonder if such a concept could be tried at one or two sessions to see how it goes. Based on the many corridor/bar/outdoors mini conversations I have seen/heard or been part of at uniforum in the past conferences, I think this would work. regards lin _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog