Please don't do a DConf 2018, consider alternatives

[Joakim]

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