<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Should Blogging ban Conferences?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://joeduck.com/2006/10/29/should-blogging-ban-conferences/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://joeduck.com/2006/10/29/should-blogging-ban-conferences/</link>
	<description>Have Blog. Will Travel.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 18:54:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: joeduck</title>
		<link>http://joeduck.com/2006/10/29/should-blogging-ban-conferences/#comment-2148</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[joeduck]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2006 23:55:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joeduck.wordpress.com/2006/10/29/should-blogging-ban-conferences/#comment-2148</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[But I like WIFI Welfare!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But I like WIFI Welfare!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Zawodny</title>
		<link>http://joeduck.com/2006/10/29/should-blogging-ban-conferences/#comment-2145</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeremy Zawodny]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:58:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joeduck.wordpress.com/2006/10/29/should-blogging-ban-conferences/#comment-2145</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m not joking at all.  Look at it this way: if the conferences are surviving merely because you can get wifi while ignoring 70% of the speakers, banning wifi will accelerate the death of those conferences.

Wifi is like welfare at this point.  It&#039;s really *not* helping anyone.  It&#039;s prolonging a sad situation.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not joking at all.  Look at it this way: if the conferences are surviving merely because you can get wifi while ignoring 70% of the speakers, banning wifi will accelerate the death of those conferences.</p>
<p>Wifi is like welfare at this point.  It&#8217;s really *not* helping anyone.  It&#8217;s prolonging a sad situation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: joeduck</title>
		<link>http://joeduck.com/2006/10/29/should-blogging-ban-conferences/#comment-2124</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[joeduck]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2006 19:17:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joeduck.wordpress.com/2006/10/29/should-blogging-ban-conferences/#comment-2124</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dude! ... They are multi-tasking and blogging the presentations!? ...

Jeremy banning WIFI?   I&#039;m assuming you are joking here?

This gets to the heart of the problem with conferences - they are an inefficient, ancient style of communication based on tribal sensibilities (shaman, under pretense of wisdom, speaks to crowd and enlightens them).  

Sure that happens some % of the time but a superior form is a loud and interactive conversation with lots of participation.  I think Blogs are the early rumblings of a sweeping and positive change in how we all talk to each other, though they are still based too much on one way &quot;one to many&quot; forms of communication rather than interactivity on many levels where the conversation is non-linear, less time sensitive, highly cross referenced with data and people, and extremely broad and inclusive.  I&#039;m hoping to experiment with Second life presentations soon as they seem to have some elements of what I see as a better model for conferencing and communication.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dude! &#8230; They are multi-tasking and blogging the presentations!? &#8230;</p>
<p>Jeremy banning WIFI?   I&#8217;m assuming you are joking here?</p>
<p>This gets to the heart of the problem with conferences &#8211; they are an inefficient, ancient style of communication based on tribal sensibilities (shaman, under pretense of wisdom, speaks to crowd and enlightens them).  </p>
<p>Sure that happens some % of the time but a superior form is a loud and interactive conversation with lots of participation.  I think Blogs are the early rumblings of a sweeping and positive change in how we all talk to each other, though they are still based too much on one way &#8220;one to many&#8221; forms of communication rather than interactivity on many levels where the conversation is non-linear, less time sensitive, highly cross referenced with data and people, and extremely broad and inclusive.  I&#8217;m hoping to experiment with Second life presentations soon as they seem to have some elements of what I see as a better model for conferencing and communication.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Zawodny</title>
		<link>http://joeduck.com/2006/10/29/should-blogging-ban-conferences/#comment-2072</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeremy Zawodny]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2006 05:15:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joeduck.wordpress.com/2006/10/29/should-blogging-ban-conferences/#comment-2072</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think more confereces should ban wifi.  It&#039;s annoying as hell to have half the &quot;audience&quot; not even paying attention to what&#039;s going on.  Why are they even in the room when they&#039;re not *really&quot; in the room?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think more confereces should ban wifi.  It&#8217;s annoying as hell to have half the &#8220;audience&#8221; not even paying attention to what&#8217;s going on.  Why are they even in the room when they&#8217;re not *really&#8221; in the room?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

