Re: Keynote Speaker(s)?

Hi, folks–

I'm hearing a fairly consistent sentiment against keynotes. (What else 
did I expect from a pack of Libertarians? :D) Assuming that y'all 
represent a meaningful segment of blockchain folks, I'm now leaning 
against having a keynote.

I made the case for having a keynote, but I'm not yet hearing any strong 
voices to reinforce the case for a keynote speaker.

So, if you do want a keynote speaker, speak now or forever hold your peace.

I don't know if folks like Stefan or Arvind will still be motivated to 
attend if they aren't giving a keynote, but let's hope.

Regards–
Doug

On 5/12/16 11:25 AM, Ryan Shea wrote:
> I vote no on the keynote as well.
>
> I'd be concerned about a bias or slant towards one particular technology
> or platform like Ripple. Combine that with the fact that the industry is
> so young and we're essentially all peers here.
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Rick Dudley <afd@erisindustries.com
> <mailto:afd@erisindustries.com>> wrote:
>
>     I don't want a keynote. I want to make progress deploying
>     decentralization technology into browsers. If he wants to have
>     discussion about using standards bodies to develop technology,
>     great. I don't want to hear about much else.
>
>     Everyone who replied is on the blockchain side of things, I much
>     rather have a keynote from someone who got some code into production
>     browsers as an outsider.
>
>     Maybe someone from Brave would be interested in joining us?
>
>     -Rick
>
>     On May 12, 2016 10:39 AM, "Neha Narula" <narula@csail.mit.edu
>     <mailto:narula@csail.mit.edu>> wrote:
>
>         I'm OK with no keynotes, but I'd like to throw out another,
>         academic option.  Arvind Narayanan, a professor in computer
>         science at Princeton:
>
>         http://randomwalker.info/
>
>         Arvind has done a ton of research in this space and actually
>         wrote a textbook on Bitcoin.  I've heard him speak (most
>         recently at the MIT Bitcoin expo, link
>         here: https://youtu.be/UVuUZm4l-ss?t=14155) and he's an
>         excellent speaker.  He can address high-level overviews and
>         broader themes while still incorporating interesting technical
>         content.
>
>         On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Trent McConaghy
>         <gtrent@gmail.com <mailto:gtrent@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>             Agree with Gavin, Chris and others - I prefer no keynotes as
>             well. Better "participatory and collaborative atmosphere"..
>
>             Lightning talks ok, but only if a fraction of the time, and
>             if there are better scene-setting mechanisms, all the better.
>
>             It would be helpful to have Stefan be part of the workshop
>             though - he's good, and as Bailey mentioned is doing going
>             through the W3C process with Interledger. Also his
>             Interledger colleague, Evan Schwartz, is appropriate.
>
>             On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Gavin Wood
>             <gavin@ethcore.io <mailto:gavin@ethcore.io>> wrote:
>
>                 I'm also inclined to stay away from keynotes and the
>                 like. I feel that the chances of engendering
>                 a participatory and collaborative atmosphere can be
>                 maximised by avoiding the elevation of any
>                 particular participants, even for a well-meaning purpose
>                 such as "getting everyone on the same page". Rather I
>                 would look for means to structure and define the events
>                 content and aims well enough beforehand to render any
>                 kind of "scene setting" largely redundant.
>
>
>                 On Thursday, 12 May 2016, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org
>                 <mailto:schepers@w3.org>> wrote:
>
>                     Hi, Christopher–
>
>                     I hear you that your preference is for an entirely
>                     participatory event.
>                     I'm less convinced than you, at this point, that
>                     everyone is on the same
>                     page.
>
>                     Having a thoughtful speaker can set a tone and
>                     context, and raise great
>                     questions that are discussed at the rest of the
>                     workshop.
>
>                     At W3C's recent Advisory Committee meeting, Bruce
>                     Schneier spoke on
>                     security and the "techno-social process" of
>                     standards and law, and it
>                     was the highlight of the event, prompting a lot of
>                     useful discussion.
>
>                     A good keynote speaker can also attract attendees,
>                     who might feel more
>                     incentive to attend for a chance to listen to and
>                     interact with the
>                     speakers.
>
>                     More replies inline…
>
>                     On 5/11/16 7:58 PM, Christopher Allen wrote:
>
>                         There are a side variety of formats possible.
>                         Just a few that I’ve
>                         used:
>
>                         * Open Space
>                         https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Space_Technology
>
>
>                     I'm open to looser agendas, but I am nervous about
>                     having a productive
>                     set of discussions if there's no general set of
>                     topics or agenda; I can
>                     see it descending quickly into rat-holing.
>
>                     There are also people who won't attend open-agenda
>                     workshops because
>                     there is less assurance of some ROI outcome. If we
>                     want to attract the
>                     right people, do you think an open agenda will be
>                     the best way to
>                     accomplish that? This isn't a rhetorical question… I
>                     don't know the
>                     blockchain community well enough to judge.
>
>                     (I've anecdotally heard from Asian colleagues that
>                     agenda-less meetings
>                     are sometimes not well-received in their cultures.)
>
>
>                         * World Cafe http://www.theworldcafe.com/ or my
>                         closely related
>                         Braid (does more mixing)
>                         http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2009/09/facilitating-small-gatherings-using-the-braid.html
>
>
>                     This
>
>
>                     sounds interesting, but also a bit complicated to
>                     manage with a
>                     large number of people.
>
>                     My own thought was that we'd break out into
>                     voluntary topic tables,
>                     where people wander in and out unconference-style,
>                     and as topic petered
>                     out or built up, we'd discover which topics garnered
>                     the most interest.
>
>
>                         * Design Workshop (example of the last one I ran
>                         https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rebooting-the-web-of-trust/blob/master/event-documents/process/RebootingtheWebOfTrustProcess.pdf
>
>
>                     )
>
>                     This also seems a bit complicated and gamified, to
>                     me. I'm somewhat
>                     skeptical of "new system" meetings where everyone
>                     has to learn the rules
>                     on the fly, which seems to inhibit natural
>                     conversation flows; they seem
>                     to be more about the process than the discussion.
>                     But I haven't
>                     experienced this particular variation, and maybe
>                     it's really effective.
>
>
>                         * Lightning Talks (truly 5 minutes talk and 5
>                         minutes Q&A) for a
>                         half-day, then election from those for further
>                         discussion for rest
>                         of day. Repeat 2nd day.
>
>
>                     This is more or less what I had in mind.
>
>
>                         * Poster Sessions
>                         https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poster_session
>
>
>                     No enough group conversation for my taste.
>
>
>                         * and there any more…
>
>
>                     Yes, many many more. I prefer to keep the rules
>                     simple, and maximize the
>                     group discussion opportunities.
>
>
>                         Another option is that one of the best graphic
>                         facilitators in the
>                         world resides in Boston, and we could retain her
>                         for $3500 and use
>                         whatever process she recommends.
>
>
>                     I like this idea, and I'd like to have the drawings
>                     for later
>                     documentation and spreading the word about the event.
>
>                     It would work well for plenary sessions; I'm not
>                     sure how it scales to
>                     multiple parallel groups discussing different topics.
>
>                     Also, we don't currently have the budget for this.
>                     I'd be even more open
>                     to it if we had more sponsors.
>
>
>                         The key point is that the knowledge is in the
>                         room, and parallel
>                         processes with smaller groups are more likely to
>                         emerge with choices
>                         for the larger group to explore.
>
>
>                     We agree there.
>
>
>                         Sage on the stage and other serial processes
>                         waste energy.
>
>
>                     I'm not convinced that's universally true.
>
>                     (I'm also skeptical of pithy slogans, like "sage on
>                     the stage". :P)
>
>
>                     But I don't want to dictate what format this
>                     workshop uses… I am open to conversation about it,
>                     making sure that we hear from a large number of
>                     people on the PC what they think will be most
>                     effective. I do want to settle on format fairly
>                     quickly, because it's a topic that can balloon to
>                     fill all available conversation time.
>
>                     How should we decide on format, in an efficient way?
>
>                     Regards–
>                     Doug
>
>
>
>                 --
>
>
>                  Dr. Gavin Wood   Director, Ethcore
>                 email: gavin@ethcore.io <mailto:gavin@ethcore.io>
>                 <https://twitter.com/gavofyork> <https://uk..linkedin.com/in/gavin-wood-88843316>
>
>
>                 *This communication and any attachments are confidential.*
>
>
>                 This communication and any attachments are confidential.
>
>
>
>
>             --
>             Follow me at @trentmc0 <https://twitter.com/trentmc0>
>             http://trent.st
>
>
>
>
>         --
>         http://nehanaru.la | @neha
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Ryan Shea*   /blockstack.com <http://blockstack.com>/
>
> /Cell: 650-564-7432 <tel:650-564-7432>/
>
> /Skype: _ryaneshea_/
>

Received on Thursday, 12 May 2016 17:23:16 UTC