-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Mike Hughes wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, vijay gill wrote:
>
>> In short, instead of coercive action, how about the presenters learn to be
>> more relevant, interesting, or fun.
>
> I'll second that [...]
If I were ever asked to present at NANOG and I were to see this comment,
I'd be sure to strike that commitment off the calendar.
I think that blaming the SPEAKER for not being relevant enough is a
pretty damning condemnation of your program committee. Speakers tell
the committee what they are talking about long before they are on stage.
Not all speakers are "interesting" or "fun" -- perhaps because they are
talking on topics that are .. uh .. technical and dry?
Not everyone that you get to speak has a good background in giving
presentations. Lots of them are technical folks that would rather be
hacking code or manipulating routing tables than behind a microphone.
Public speaking is a class that is pretty expensive, and lots of
technical people don't get the opportunity to become professionally
trained speakers because that's not what their job is and their
employers would rather them be productive in the technical aspects of
their job.
Disrespect for a speaker that you feel is irrelevant, boring and un-fun
just shows that you are a rude and elitist audience.
To be clear, I'm not advocating removing network access for the
attendees, just a change of attitude regarding the appropriate use of
the connection that is made available.
AlanC {Dale Carnegie trained speaker, presenter, relevant, interesting
and fun guy that had thought about presenting at NANOG, but won't now}
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFIfMxVcKpYUrUDCYcRAt8EAJ0YCtrjamGWbZPT/AfHp4miujgjoQCbBTjj
Rov5THNRhKgkWS10fQKRKeQ=
=yZ7M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Nanog-futures mailing list
Nanog-futures@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
