Force of Good

Don't Blame BackNoise

Sep 28, 09 in Internet, Marketing, Presentations   40 Comments

People are good.  It's a fundamental belief of mine.  People should be friendly and courteous.  It is our obligation as members of a somewhat advanced civilization to treat other individuals with dignity and respect. To be cooperative, direct, honest and open. To also be graceful with measured words and actions.

I say this as I ponder the New Media Atlanta conference that took place last Friday.   If you have not heard by now it was, to say the least, a quite interesting event.  Seems that a little app called BackNoise become a very important part of the proceedings.  Allie Sullivan, Paul Chaney (two places) and Stacy Williams, with this thoughtful article, have nice summaries of the proceedings.  All of these folks are missing a few fundamental factors that led to the digression that they describe.

I have led and participated in my fair share of conferences in my day.  I understand how hard it is to put something together.  I understand how thankless the task can be.  I applaud Matt Fagioli and Brad Nix for taking upon themselves to put New Media Atlanta together.  But while I know Stacy and respect her a great geal, I am going to respectfully disagree with her.  The conference was not great.  It opened slow.  With an hour of sponsors trotting across the stage.  It started out so slow that the first scheduled speaker, Jeff Turner (who by the way did a masterful job moderating an afternoon panel), got up on the stage and said, to paraphrase, "the conference sucked thus far" according to BackNoise.

It really did not suck, but the slow opening led to people distracting themselves and many of them ended up on BackNoise.  Once people got there they did not leave.  They did not leave the back channel because the conference content was too basic for the audience.  A negative comment vicious cycle ensued.

But you can't blame this on a simple Web application.  BackNoise is merely a thing.  A thing that lets anyone create back channel conversations with zero friction. I like to think about it as event specific Usenet, though others prefer an IRC analogy.

Regardless, just like Usenet, IRC, and any other online community, it is up to the community members to set acceptable standards. The New Media Atlanta community failed to set standards that many of the participants deemed to be acceptable.  But you can't blame that on BackNoise and the presence of anonymity.  Much of the commentary on the Internet is carried out under anonymity and unidentifiable pseudonyms.  Many complained of the anonymity.  Few called out participants that were carrying out what they deemed unacceptable behavior.  Even fewer, including those that are now blaming BackNoise and anonymity, took to posting under a user name. 

Most just stared and watched the train wreck.  They just watched, without trying to push the car off the tracks. They watched without calling attention to the wrongness of what was transpiring.  The organizers did not participate or guide the back channel in any meaningful way.

I am one of the very, very few that put my name on some comments (due to my sense of self importance if you were to believe the back channel).  I did this to try and diffuse the situation.  And yes, like many of the speakers, I was attacked.  So what, there is nothing to fear from those that are anonymous. 

When it came time for Chris Brogan to get on stage what he did was brilliant.  He confronted what he feared the most head on.  He shed his presentation (if he had one) and projected BackNoise on the stage screen during his speech.

Are they some things that could be done to improve BackNoise and make it a more conference friendly?  Sure, I have been telling Keith Mcgreggor, the creator, for some time I believe this to be the case (BTW what is better about telling someone they suck using your real name rather than anonymously).  And Keith is currently actively seeking ways to improve BackNoise based on what has transpired.

But if you are feeling icky and sick as a result of what happened at New Media Atlanta, don't blame it on BackNoise.  Look in the mirror.  Next time a back channel pops up at a conference that you are attending don't just watch.  Take an active role in setting the norms and standards on what you want the community to be.  Don't complain after the fact.  Do something in the moment to lift the conversation.  Do something good.

Comments

Good summary Lance. As I said on Colin Ake's blog, some not only wanted to shoot the messenger, they wanted to blame the manufacturer of the stationary.

Paul Freet  |  Sep 29, 09 at 07:44 AM

Good post Lance. BackNoise seems the latest in a long list of startups that get the short end of the stick by allowing people to pass notes in class. Classy move by Mr. Brogan, taking the high road.

Jeremy Conescu  |  Sep 29, 09 at 08:26 AM

Love the topic and the tool that sparked the discussion. Fascinating real-time social psychology demonstration.

Lance, I can't tell which view of individuals you hold. You begin by saying "People are good", then proceed to show where individuals were not, and end with an *appeal* to be good.

The assumption that when anonymous, people are inherently good fails to match up with the research. (Check the classics social psych experiments - Milgram, Stanford prison, Kitty Genovese.) This doesn't mean we shouldn't have the option, but the direction of a leaderless group will naturally trend downward.

Thank you for your act of leadership standing up to coral the snark cats. For the rest of folks out there, remember this key aspect: if the tool is being used YOU need to provide leadership to keep it from becoming Lord of the Flies.

Sean Mahoney  |  Sep 29, 09 at 08:56 AM

YOU are missing the point, or breezing right past it rather. The content DID suck at New Media Atlanta. It sucked so bad it made even a primo seller of Air Nothing like Brogan look like he'd just made f-ing Quadrophenia.

Whomever organized NMA and chose the speakers had no clue about the community they were attempting to serve, making it quite clear they were interested only in relieving you suckers who attended in person of your hard-earned money... something they did quite well actually, and should be applauded as the excellent snake oil salespersons that they are.

Now all they need are some gypsies, tramps and thieves, and they can take that conference content clown car show on the road! They'd do our TV evangelists proud.

Anyone with such a deep and abiding lack of intel and understanding about the cultural fabric of the city in which they claim to have lives, although I doubt that part, deserves to be back-noised into whatever culture-free-zone cave they came from.

But they can care for their deep wounds with the best YOUR money can buy as they sure collected plenty of THAT with their bogus "rock star" level rooms, paid lunches and an outlet for every laptop nonsense.

Attendees got fleeced. People get mad when that happens. Anyone stupid enough to try that content-free stunt again can expect plenty more of the same treatment. Worse too.

Not that anyone but the drooling comatose would ever again pay more than a dollar now for a social media conference in Atlanta. Why would they after the crap they were served when they paid over a hundred dollars to gape at nothing but children, geeks and those no-infamous "porn star mimes" at NMA?

Then again, NMA set the bar so hilariously low that there is only one way to go now, for anyone who'd even bother at this point in staging their neighbor from the cul-de-sac at a podium, sticking a "Hello! I'm A Social Media Expert" badge on 'em, and charging top dollar for sitting around in a room just to show-off your Mac Air laptop in what is nothing but a big fat Twitter circle j*rk.

We've got an excellent zoo in Atlanta for far more interesting viewing for far less money. And anyone mooching their neighbor's wi-fi can call out content-free boondoggles right from the comfort of their own home.

Grayson Daughters  |  Sep 29, 09 at 09:06 AM

I listened to NMA on dakno.tv streaming live (go, Livestream/Mogulus if I read the source code right!) while I was working on TechDrawl from the opening until 2:00 when I had a meetingI also had Backnoise open, and like Stacy Williams said in her post, the decline in enthusiasm and confidence by the organizers was almost palpable as they read the comments. That was sad because it was their first conference. The speaker from Turner was outstanding and humble. I missed Brogan but heard good reviews. The rest of what I heard on dakno.tv was indeed too elementary for most of the audience. So, not every conference is good. This is true in every field. Either NMA learns from the experience and improves their content and time management, or they don't. Backnoise is a helpful tool especially in the polite South where people lie a lot. "You did a GREAT job!" "I LOVED your presentation!" I would probably cry as a speaker if I read some of those comments, but that's my problem. I disagree with Grayson Daughters level of vitriol. Settle down! I've paid $6k for a 5-day dental conference or two. Most of us are watching our dollars, but the networking was worth the registration cost. Or, you could have paid nothing and listened to it on dakno.tv. Cut the organizers some slack. No one has any extra money to bring in golden speakers, especially when you have to keep the entrance fees ridiculously low so people don't whine. Most of the conferences and camps in Atlanta are valuable and confidence is not going to be shaken by one disappointment.

Celia Dyer  |  Sep 29, 09 at 10:26 AM

Your punctuation, of lack thereof, sucks, Ms. Dyer. Polite southerners HATE erroneous punctuation. What make me far more unsettled than bitty wankers wanking in cyberspace is the fact that there's a typo in my original post. I'm going to go, like, starve myself now.

Grayson Daughters  |  Sep 29, 09 at 10:30 AM

The issue with BackNoise that I have seen here and on other occasions is that it's like a science experiment where the presence of an observer influences the outcome. I've seen moderators try to adapt on the fly, sometimes for the best and sometimes not. Not everything in life has to be interactive. An occasional one-to-many presentation where the presenter gets to make his or her case uninterrupted can be a good thing. We all need to be lectured to now and then, and we can show respect in those cases.

I just hope Kanye West doesn't find out about BackNoise!

Ben Dyer  |  Sep 29, 09 at 10:48 AM

The event wasn't live-streamed, was it? Backnoise usually gets even sharper and less tolerant of BS when people can chime in without even being physically present.

I didn't attend so I shouldn't comment on these speakers directly, but Backnoise (and a thousand sites that look just like it) should certainly strike fear into the hearts of non-content speakers going forward.

Those speakers who got angry... what will they do when they agree to speak at conferences going forward? Make sure there's no way for the attendees to anonymously group up and share their thoughts live? L.O.L. to that thought. The tech that allows this kind of collaboration is going to get MORE pervasive, not less.

And I think it's awesome. (And fwiw, I too post under my real name when using Backnoise. Ego issues, you understand.)

Loren Norman  |  Sep 29, 09 at 10:55 AM

As I said on my blog, anonymous comments are OK. Whatever the community allows as acceptable is going to pass. We'll see this get better in the future, I'm sure.

Grayson, you're anything but a polite southerner. The truth is that while those that attended the conference had the right to judge whether or not their content was worth their money. To sit at home leeching wifi and bombard a conference from afar is not polite, professional, or acceptable. What you do with your time is your own business, certainly. That said, it is not appropriate or polite for an individual to make inappropriate comments about an event they chose not to attend. If an event isn't worth your time, move on to something that is.

And if the conference wasn't worth your time, neither is this blog post.

Colin Ake  |  Sep 29, 09 at 10:59 AM

Event attendees in the past have always been a completely captive audience. Beholden to the quality or complete lack thereof of the program.

Backnoise is like the hammer in the 1984 Apple commercial. Breaking the paradigm forever. Big brother organizers can no longer ride herd over their conference audience - they are now empowered and have a voice.

Don't treat your constituents like sheep and expect them to remain silent. Listen to them, address their concerns, humbly appeal to their civility and we will all get along.

Paul Freet  |  Sep 29, 09 at 10:59 AM

I attended NMATL, and am interested in understanding both sides of the Backnoise issue. My experience at NMATL was not at all negative. I was able to see many 'old' friends from other venues, and was thoroughly impressed with, and very happy to meet, Chris Brogan. Negative criticism is good in many ways, and I know the NMATL principals will make the most of the negative criticism. They have always made a point to ask for criticism after their events. They are extremely tech-savvy guys who take pride in what they do. Their next events will be all the better for what transpired at NMATL. Anonymous endless snarking probably isn't the best use of Backnoise, but it seems a happy medium could evolve.

Susie Blackmon  |  Sep 29, 09 at 11:02 AM

Oh, man. I don't like to get into fights online. But, I also don't like to get ripped off. New Media Atlanta was supposed to be "Making the Business Case for Social Media," not "What is Social Media?" or, worse, "What was Social Media like 6 to 24 months ago?"

Unfortunately, there was very little in the way of how businesses are using social media and the results they're seeing. The talks that did touch on this didn't offer a lot of details and the format made audience-speaker interaction difficult. It would have been great to use Twitter/BackNoise to solicit audience questions.

I've been to conferences that have done this much better. As a group, the attendees had a lot of knowledge and experience that would have supplemented the presentations and helped fill in what they lacked.

What makes laugh is that people tried to pin the poor experience they had on the users of BackNoise. Referring to them as "weak losers" who need to be "called out" for "hiding behind anonymity." Please! If you (or your company) can't take criticism, fold your social media program right now because you'd rather live in a fantasy world. In the real world, you can learn a lot from your critics.

Sure some of the comments were harsh and maybe a little too rude, but most of it was either hilarious or spot-on and often both.

If there was anything to be learned at New Media Atlanta is that if you aren't authentic and do what you say, you'll be called out. You can either let it ruin your day or learn from it.

Emily  |  Sep 29, 09 at 11:06 AM

Ms. Grayson, that's Dr. Dyer not Ms. Dyer. Or, you may call me Celia.

Celia Dyer  |  Sep 29, 09 at 11:09 AM

Just wanted to say I actually knew what Sean was talking about with the Milgram, Stanford prison and Kitty Genovese experiments/events... thanks Georgia Tech social psychology class!

Paul Stamatiou  |  Sep 29, 09 at 11:17 AM

Dr. Dryer, you can call me anything you wish. But I am 100% Southerner. With a cap "S."

Gotta run go pilfer some fine 'hooch and a good wi-fi signal up in North GA, otherwise I'd hang out here for some more geekazoid fun and games.

Y'all please don't behave yourselves here though. Otherwise y'all will bore an entire city to death. AGAIN!

Grayson Daughters  |  Sep 29, 09 at 11:18 AM

One more thing before I rev up the Chevy and head out on the highway... if you don't want people to see any little menz behind the curtains, I sure wouldn't point a live-stream right on 'em.

That really gives not-so-polite Southerners watching from their crumbling Buckhead estates WAY too much to do with their pilfered wi-fi, Uncle Percy Bedford Nathanial Sottille III's ancient laptop and their considerable idle time.

Especially when they were supposed to be cleaning out Uncle Bedford Nathanial Sottille III's bird dog cages since they got outta rehab. Ya know, earning their keep for that crappy garage apt. and grudging familial obligations and stuff.

TTFN!

Grayson Daughters  |  Sep 29, 09 at 11:40 AM

Lance's original post supposes people are inherently good. That misses the mark. Like Gladwell talks about in his "Tipping Point" book, we often ascribe values or actions to a person or group of people when we really should be looking to the context in which those actions are made. This is because of the way we as social beings think - we are much more likely to blame or attribute that to characteristics associated with the person him/herself than the environment in which that person is placed.

Sean has already hit this nail on the head when referring to group psychology experiments/studies. Regardless of external stimuli (conference material and relevance), BackNoise opens the door to a consequence-free environment that will lead to downward trending groupthink.

While this is an interesting "social experiment" vis-a-vis 4chan, etc. it does not seem to be a productive environment to embrace or legitimize in a conference setting where the bar is trying to be held high esp. with regard to keeping at least a modicum of respect for all involved.

/flame on!

Zach Bailey  |  Sep 29, 09 at 11:42 AM

I didn't attend this event live nor did I follow the live stream or BackNoise. But, the main point of an app like BackNoise is to get uncensored feedback, even if anonymous. I've seen pretty brutal feedback at conferences with high profile speakers - Enterprise 2.0 2009 in Boston comes to mind. Personally, I welcome feedback, granted some may not use the languages I'd prefer. But, it tells me my strengths and weaknesses. North, South, East or West of the country should not matter at all. My two cents!

Moushumi Kabir  |  Sep 29, 09 at 11:46 AM

Zach - it does not matter whether productive or legitimate. It is going to happen regardless. People will use a back channel to communicate at conferences and other captive events. If for no other reason than sheer boredom.

Event organizers now need to learn how to work with it.

Paul Freet  |  Sep 29, 09 at 11:46 AM

Grayson, you're hilarious. I'm a Southerner with a capital "S" but my relatives were moonshiners up in Banks Co. who married their chicken coopin' cousins over in Hall Co. :-)

Celia Dyer  |  Sep 29, 09 at 11:54 AM

Paul,

You're totally right that it is going to happen regardless. But whether it is legitimized does matter. I think we can all agree that the signal-to-noise ratio of BackNoise in the vast majority of cases is going to be very low. My supposition is that this is because of the social context backnoise creates via anonymity.

If BackNoise is not embraced as a legitimate feedback channel then anything said in there is quickly marginalized and/or ignored and then it immediately has less weight and it is seen for what it is - just noise. Trolls feed on attention and legitimacy. As I've argued, anonymous environments can turn even the best of us into trolls.

I completely agree event organizers should embrace multiple channels to receive feedback but those channels need to foster constructive criticism, whether positive or negative. An event organizer can choose to monitor BackNoise but IMO they need to remain detached as to not throw fuel on the fire.

Zach Bailey  |  Sep 29, 09 at 12:03 PM

Backnoise needs a reputation system of some kind, to facilitate some kind of moderation, even as people remain anonymous. It will be a much better tool that way, with the 5 or 10% of pure spite removed by it's users. People are good, so the tool should facilitate good behavior. At the moment, it often facilitates bad behavior, but I believe this can be fixed.

I look forward to continuing improvements to backnoise.

Russell Jurney  |  Sep 29, 09 at 12:13 PM

Backnoise is not for conference organizers. It is for the attendees. Conference organizers would prefer to continue to get their feedback on 3x5 cards at the end of the conference and never, ever share them.

Paul Freet  |  Sep 29, 09 at 12:18 PM

Yes, always go with the little 3X5 paper cards. That way you can roll your own feedback and smoke it. Like the seeds and stems you were sold under the bleachers in high school.

Aunt Weezie Done Lost Her Wi-Fi In The Flood  |  Sep 29, 09 at 12:27 PM

+1 on Russell's comment. Rep systems would be very helpful.

Excellent post, Lance.

I didn't put in the money for NMATL, but I did catch the live stream and was a part of the Backnoise. While I did put in some snark, I put in my name. While this conference was in it's first year and had a few hits, and a lot of misses, the response that came from it by the organizers and Brogan (who I sometimes disagree with), was accepting.

Backnoise exists, we can't go back now, and I love that it's now out there. We now have a tool to publicly determine the mood of a conference or event, and if you don't care for the comments, don't pay attention to them. It brings a conversation or opinions that would otherwise be done purely over AIM or Google Talk and honestly, would divide the community over those thinking that one speaker is really crappy, etc.

I for one, would welcome feedback about my performance in real time, it moves us from the "holier than thou", more uni-directional event format to one where you know what your audience wants and where they want to go with that information, something truly more collaborative, and frankly, less boring.

brandon sheats  |  Sep 29, 09 at 12:43 PM

They should have done "Breakfast with Brogan", followed by the Turner guy, and closed with beer samples from @mondaynight at 11:45 a.m.

BackNoise would have been more positive and entertaining with that lineup.

BackNoise is great. You can't learn when people lie to your face and tell you how great you are. Once you see what they really think, you can adapt, improve or give up.

By the way, this is a great blog Lance.

Jeremy Porter  |  Sep 29, 09 at 01:08 PM

I'll ask a question I've asked before: what is the goal of BackNoise? Put another way, what are we trying to accomplish? Without a clear idea it is difficult to evaluate.

Paul, I agree that other people have acted in less than honorable ways in the past. But that does not and cannot justify my commission of bad acts today. I'm not suggesting that all BackNoise actions are bad, but I firmly disagree with the logic of "but, they sucked too". Similarly, the effect is different from saying to one person versus announcing over the loudspeaker. "It was already being said" may be true, but there is more to a message than the words offered.

Finally, and with the hope that it helps lighten the discussion, I've come up with a few options for BackNoise tag lines...

Because Snark is Better Shared

I snark, therfore I am...

When complaining to your friends just isn't enough

Those who can't present, Backnoise.

Snark for snark sake.

For mute parapelegics and anyone too chicken to speak up

Helping confernce organizers realize they suck since 2008

I don't have the rugged good looks or fortitude to back it up, but I want to pretend to be Sawyer. (Lost reference)

It's the circle of life, and it moves us all, especially 'cause we were picked on in high school

Sean Mahoney  |  Sep 29, 09 at 01:16 PM

Excellent post Lance.

Excuse my flag waving, but I think it comes down to freedom of speech. Sometimes it can be petty and hurtful, but it is good thing.

And yes, people are good.

Eric Winter  |  Sep 29, 09 at 01:45 PM

I wish I was like Lance and think, "people are good". I don't. Even with that said I will take all the feedback I can get. Ultimately what I do with that feedback is my decision.

I spent way too much time with too little progress probably in part because I had no idea what startup success looks like. I still don’t, but at the time I thought when the right people say, “sounds good” it means you are headed in the right direction. I doubt a little anonymous feedback will derail someone that is headed towards success but it might serve as a reality check for someone that is way off course.

Chris Morris  |  Sep 29, 09 at 02:24 PM

Jeremy Porter, you reminded how good @mondaynight's presentation was. Agreed, those 3 would have been enough.

Celia Dyer  |  Sep 29, 09 at 02:57 PM

Interesting that no one posted a comment anonymously.

Anon  |  Sep 29, 09 at 04:42 PM

great point Anon
do we fear Lance's detection ability, not care anymore about anonymity in general, or has backnoise lost it's allure already?

Anonymous Coward  |  Sep 29, 09 at 07:25 PM

Lance, thanks so much for continuing the conversation - I'm pleased with how many people have joined in and all the great points that others have made.

I actually agree with everything you wrote above. I never blamed BackNoise for the ugliness last week - I blamed the people posting anonymous personal attacks. It's the old "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument.

You really made me think with your comments about taking action at the moment rather than watching and doing nothing. You're absolutely right.

I suppose I didn't do anything at the time because I was new to BackNoise and didn't know what the unofficial rules and culture were for that community. (Social Media 101: Lurk and learn before jumping in and doing something inappropriate and getting flamed!)

It did take me a day or so after the event to sort through my emotions and gather my thoughts enough to put them on paper (so to speak). But now that my thoughts are clear, I am, as you suggested, going to be more active in trying to shape the community standards for the BackNoise channel at events I attend. Using my name, of course.

That is, if I even tune in to BackNoise next time. As I said in my original post, shame on me for continuing to watch BackNoise, and shame on me for letting it affect how I viewed the event.

As others have pointed out, transparency is good and it's here to stay. Again, I have nothing against constructive criticism that will help a speaker or event organizer meet their audience's needs. But I will never find comments bashing people's ages, weights, looks, mannerisms, or pronunciations to be appropriate, particularly in a business setting, and especially when the subjects of attack are volunteering their time to share information for the good of all.

Stacy Williams  |  Sep 29, 09 at 08:49 PM

Stacy: Namaste.

Lance  |  Sep 29, 09 at 10:03 PM

Salam namaste!Salam namaste!Salam namaste!Salam namaste!

That was the hot shit Bollywood the entire time I was in India.

Bollywood  |  Sep 30, 09 at 01:12 AM

Lance,

I commend your efforts to defuse the situation at the conference. But your post was mostly directed to the critics of BN. Surely this is not the real issue. You're ignoring the pig on the porch here.

You say we have an "obligation to treat other individuals with dignity and respect". But the use case for BN is (or was) *snark* - snide remarks intended to belittle and ridicule. What do you have to say to those rude users? Those who used BN as intended.

Anonymous free speech has its place when there is risk to the speaker. But isn't the risk avoided with BN specifically the risk of social sanction for being disrespectful?

Come to think of it, anonymous media is not social media at all.

The issue is the diffuse responsibility abetted by anonymity. It is anonymous only so far as the peers give anonymous cover. And in this case, these peers are from a small set and so they (you) had some sense of who was going over the line. When there's diffuse responsibility among peers it's their responsibility to insist on standards. It is not the responsibility of those who are being ridiculed.

Here's my recommendations. Will you second them?
-- Reject snark pits and let them fade away. Choose positive forums instead.
-- Don't give anonymous cover. Decloak, leaving no practical anonymity for the few remaining jerks.
-- Don't give evil the daytime cover of Southern gentility. Call it when you see it, whether anonymous or attributed.

Rick Thomas  |  Sep 30, 09 at 03:23 AM

Rick:

I can not speak for BN directly but it is my belief that the creator had no intention for the app to be used to belittle. He seems to be taking steps to make sure that does not happen in the future.

I disagree that "anonymous media is not social media." As I stated in the post, much of the commentary on the Internet is carried out under anonymity and pseudonyms. It is part of the fabric of the Internet and we are not going to change that. Even making an attempt to do so is not being open. That is why anon comments are allowed and comments are not moderated on this blog. I can not agree that anonymity should be pushed out of the Internet. I can agree that we all should call it when we see it as people have done in this comment stream.

Lance  |  Sep 30, 09 at 07:26 AM

Lance, finally glad to put a face with a name so to speak. Great post which obviously incited quite a bit of commentary.

This is a hot topic and one worthy of discussion, anonymously or not. Unfortunately, like most controversial issues in social media (sponsored conversations, for example) I'm suspect that this one will result in any kind of unanimous conclusion.

I suppose we will learn to live and let live, and each of us will be responsible for our own behavior in this anything goes world.

One thing is for sure, speakers better learn they will be judged on the quality of their presentation more than on the substance of their content. And, for heaven's sake speakers, if you're going to use PPT, it better be good!

Paul Chaney  |  Sep 30, 09 at 09:39 AM

I attend the Cap Ventures showcase last night and found Backnoise to be a great tool and used well. I'm not sure why it was so much different at NMA than at Cap Ventures but it could be any of the following:

1. Extensive dialog to-date made people aware of the unofficial "rules" and bad behavior from NMA was avoided.

2. Audience was "different" than NMA. CV09 was mainly investors, early stage CEO's, ATDC, TAG, and ATA leaders. Don't know about NMA.

3. Audience was "wanting" and in some cases "willing" these presenters to succeed. They were all pitching their dream.

4. The 34 presenters were limited to 3 minutes each, so even if they were not great they were over quick.

5. CV09 was free and that tends to increase your tolerance for weak content if it occurs.

6. there were clear leaders on Backnoise setting the tone of the conversation.

In any event, it worked well from my point of view and there is a reason. May be one (or more) of the above or one I've missed but the results were vastly different for some reason.

Jeff  |  Sep 30, 09 at 11:11 AM

Excellent Jeff. Your first five points show the contrast in the two events and capture why the NMA attendees were dissatisfied. On your last point, the conferences were the same: there were also some leaders at NMA who set the tone of the conversation - a strongly negative tone. And this is the real issue.

Was it okay for a group of professionals in this community to mob together and disrupt a conference? Was it okay to hound people publicly for qualities that the gang considered ridiculous?

I say no.

To quote Lance "Will the community once again remain silent?"

Rick Thomas  |  Sep 30, 09 at 01:23 PM

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

  Remember me?
Comments: