62
What are your opinions on in-person conferences?
(programming.dev)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2023
62 points (100.0% liked)
Programming
17314 readers
152 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
As someone that works in the events industry.
Conferences are about the networking and social aspects.
This is not achievable through virtual or prerecorded aspects.
I've done gigs where a few CEOs zoom/teams/whatever in to show face.
I've done gigs where it's all in 1 location with only people in the room.
I've done gigs where it's people in the room, but some satellite venues that "dial in" (even done a few of the satellite venues).
I've done gigs with CSuites at multiple locations, and each site takes turns presenting some part of the conference.
Honestly, all of this can be done via zoom or some other platform to much the same effect.
What you can't get is the face-to-face time, incidental conversations, random introductions, and drunken conversations that happen over lunch, coffee, bar and dinner events.
And I see this in "happier" clients. TBH, the good clients. The ones that have interesting presentations and engaged audiences are also the ones who benefit most from these extra social interactions.
The gigs where it's some death-by-powerpoint should have just been a zoom meeting, or dare I say just an email or 2.
So, I'd say it's how invested you are in the topic.
If it's something you care about (or affects you directly): go in-person. You will get more from the event than is what is on the schedule.
If it's something you have to go to, save the planet: watch it online (or whatever is the minimum mandated by your company). You aren't going to benefit from the social aspects, leave that to you manager.
I am seeing the trend of team leaders and key people attending conferences, with many others watching virtually (like a 1:4 ratio).
Thank you for the insight. Have you organized or been to a conference that used 3D virtual spaces? Like Mozilla Hubs or something similar?
If so, what was your impression of it?
If not, do you think they might be useful?
Is this a recent trend started by COVID?
It is a recent trend after COVID.
Before COVID, having virtual participants or presentations, even live streams were a luxury item.
There was one client I worked with that was an early adopter of zoom pre-pandemic, and they did a lot of multi-venue stuff with presentations happening in all venues, calling out to remote office boardrooms for presentations from that region, stuff like that.
It was charged at a premium (because it was unknown tech, so needed a lot of supplimentary technicians and equipment to mitigate the unknown risks, as well as get the virtual aspects to the same level of production as the in-person aspects).
Some of the more important presenters would have technicians with a bunch of studio/streaming kit sent to their location to make it feel fancier for the presenter.
I'm sure the client saved more on flights and hotels than the extra cost of the virtual aspects of the events. But it was a premium item that not everyone could afford, or was internally set up for.
Post pandemic, live streaming is expected, it's pretty much a standard option tbh. Every company has their own internal platform (even if it's just Facebook pro or whatever it's called) and all event companies have a multi purpose platform if the client wants something different.
Virtual participants are done with a single laptop and no backups (unless it's a very high level event), expectations from virtual interactions are lower (before, there would have to be analysis of any dropped frames, bitrate drops, stutters etc), presenters are much more comfortable handling their own tech (some even dial in dangerously close to their time slot, making the techs sweat) and 50-75% of the conferences I do now have virtual presenters.
It's certainly a lot cheaper, as the tech is now known, it's capabilities proven during lockdown, and the systems and skills to use it were developed as a standard skillset of techs.
No, I haven't used any 3d virtual things.
The fanciest I did was a zoom-room to audience wall, but it all got composited into a standard stream.
That's surprising. I must looking at the wrong conferences or not finding the option on the conference pages. But I'm happy that you're reporting that trend in your conferences.
Thank you for the insights. Always difficult as an outsider to know what's going on behind the scenes.
Maybe it's just that I do more corporate conferences instead of exhibition or symposium type conferences.
I think companies that have adapted for COVID are a lot more set up for virtual participation at their conferences.
Whereas, a symposium kinda thing where delegates buy tickets expect presentations to be in-person. Which makes sense, it's what they are paying for. otherwise they could've saved money and just watched the stream/VODs