Idiotprogrammer Blog

Category: geekevents

  • The Man Who Needs No Introduction

    A few years ago I was on a  panel at a conference, and someone asked how  I ought to be introduced. “Just say I am a Houston writer.”

    I wasn’t being coy; I genuinely hate introductions – giving them, receiving them and having to sit through them. They are as annoying as the warnings at the front of DVDs.

    There are many reasons to hate introductions. They are  too long.  They mention unnecessary details. In this Internet age, most of us could look this information up if interested. In many instances, the biographical sketch is already on the program or  panel description, so you are simply repeating  well-known information.

    A less important complaint is that these introductions dwell on accomplishments and pedigrees. At one point in my life  I found it interesting that someone got a degree  from Harvard or Stanford, but now I no longer do.  Going through a prestigious academic  program makes it more likely that the speaker has been exposed to the latest research; on the other hand, it also means that the person has probably absorbed certain ideas about education and entitlement and probably had little difficulty pursuing an academic career. Successful academics got tenure because they  already received these distinctions.  When you attend a lecture, you don’t need to be persuaded that the speaker will be interesting or important  — you are already there!

    Other people have started businesses or charities, written books, started Internet trends, written  new web applications. I don’t mean to dismiss those kinds of accomplishments. They seem to point to external signs of success or  external validation. To be honest, I have no way of knowing whether these accomplishments are truly impressive or just routine milestones along a certain career path. Most of the time, I don’t care because  the only thing important to me is what will be said during the talk.  Even if I did care about these accomplishments, I want to hear the speaker describe them in his own words.  The talk is all that matters.

    I work in writing and publishing; I am aware of how many perfectly interesting and gifted people are ignored or overlooked because of happenstance (indeed, I count myself in that category). Perhaps I haven’t achieved my “true” potential (whatever that means), but I have embarked on some interesting projects. Some of these projects  have succeeded; some have failed; some are ongoing or deferred, so there is no way to judge the value of these projects right now.  There are some projects which I never fully realize for practical reasons. Either I lacked the time or money to execute it or was distracted by another project or some personal crisis  prevented me from dedicating the necessary time to it. Sometimes in the middle of doing something, I realize that the project was not worth finishing; perhaps someone had already done it (and done it better), or perhaps some part of the project was outside my level of talent or interest.  The biggest constraint for a writer is time and money; how do you work on your projects without bankrupting yourself in the process?  How do you balance the day job with the outside projects? Logically, it makes sense to work on projects one at a time, but practically  that almost never happens – especially if you keep stumbling on new subjects of interest.  Alas, nobody said the writer’s life was going to be easy.

    It’s hard for many to pretend that social position doesn’t matter when it comes to exchanging ideas. A few years ago I attended a TED talk in Houston. It wasn’t awful or anything, but the speakers were profoundly unexciting. The speakers were  competent academics, most of whom had boring and predictable (but well-researched) ideas (See note at bottom). One was a medical researcher pontificating about science.  I wouldn’t say his presentation was awful, but it really didn’t go anywhere; the audience applauded wildly (I have never seen this kind of fervor  for a speaker). It reminded me of the phenomenon where people who normally have no love for classical music suddenly fall in love with a movie about classical music. In that case, you don’t really love classical music; you are simply expressing appreciation for the idea of  classical music by saying you like the movie. All the speakers were applauded by the audience not for the content of their presentation, but because they had achieved some level of distinction in  their field.   It is basically the celebration of academic success.  Horray, success!

    I’ve run a few panels and given a few talks; though I’ve given some good ones, I’m always surprised at how many  remarkable people turn up in  the audience — some of whom never manage to ask a question.  Some of the unconference techniques are better at facilitating the exchange and dissemination of ideas among these types.  I attended an energy conference two years ago; the  best part was a catered lunch  where everyone sat at the round table and had a chance to ask questions of 2 experts assigned to that table.   Attendees could just float from one table to another and discover on their own who was talking about subjects they found interesting. Sure, sometimes it is necessary or even ideal  to sit through an hour long talk because of the subject matter; for some subjects, you need almost 30 or 40 minutes just to lay the foundation for what you are about to talk about.    In that case, the introduction just further delays the main point of a talk.

    For various reasons, I have stopped attending workshops or panels in person. Instead, I  watch a lot of lectures on Youtube or listen to  podcasts.  I’ve always found it easy to skip speaker introductions — just cue Youtube to the right place. One of the most mind-blowing lectures I have ever seen was a one hour talk about climate change solutions by  atmospheric scientist Marc Jacobson.  (I must have watched it three times).  Unfortunately before he speaks,  Jacobson is given 18 minutes of introduction by two people who are dull speakers and have practically nothing interesting to say. But who needs people to prepare you for what Professor Jacobson has to say?

    Yesterday, at an environmental justice conference, the introducer to an well-known investigative journalist departed from routine by relating a charming anecdote about being arrested together with this same journalist at an environmental protest.  I love offbeat and personal introductions; writers and artists often do such things.  Something 3 to 5 minutes is perfectly adequate — the shorter, the better.

    At the same environmental  conference,  the keynote speaker received a long and adulatory introduction from one of his department underlings.  That isn’t necessarily a problem,  but unfortunately the underling (a noted scholar himself) went into excruciating detail about this speaker’s accomplishments and bibliography — all of which could easily be found on wikipedia. In fact, the keynote speaker gave an outstanding talk — he surely deserved those  accolades — but ultimately what mattered was not  that Book X  won an award or that the speaker met Bill Clinton but that his presentation had compelling points to make.

    I mentioned elsewhere that panels can have a  more interesting dynamic than single-person lectures.  You are exposed to multiple  perspectives,  and  audience members  are less deferential to a panel than to  a single speaker. If you think about it, a single speaker wields way too much power; he towers behind the podium and determines with the clicker which Power Point bullet points will be seared into  everybody’s  retinas. Sure, with panels you have people jostling to make remarks and that is frustrating, but rowdiness can be part of the fun.   Often after a talk, I chase down an  audience member  who said  something unusual or  ask a panel member a follow up. I   find such encounters enormously  rewarding — note that I did not  need a  formal introduction to decide that a particular audience member  was interesting or worth listening to.

    Here are three reasons why introductions can be so appalling.

    First, intros often feel compelled to acknowledge their funding source.  This lecture was made possible by a grant from the Blubbertibubb Foundations, with hotel accommodations at the Hilton Hotel. It is part of a Distinguished Visiting Curmudgeon Lecture series which was created in 2002 under the auspices of the Archeology department in conjunction with the American Society for Jugglers under the leadership of department chair William H. Tralfaz who came up the idea for the series during a university-wide inititiative to have more stuffy eggheads visit this  campus. Who cares! Who cares! Who cares! Who Cares!

    I realize that sometimes an introduction needs to contain something about the funding source (especially if the benefactor is a 90 year old philanthropist sitting in the front row of the lecture hall).  Hey, it’s ok to give the occasional shout-out — as long as it’s no more than 10 words long! You can easily convey this same information on promotional flyers, handouts and even the opening slide.

    I mentioned this in another piece that ” If you cause 100 people to wait an extra five minutes, that means you are destroying 500 minutes of human time.” Every minute of the talk better count, and unfortunately intros never do.  Think about it — how many times do you reminisce about a gloriously long-winded introduction to  a talk  and not the talk itself?  My guess is you never do — although maybe you recall the annoying sensation of having to wait for the speaker actually to start speaking.

    Second, for high-profile speakers, often the dean (or even the university president!) will  insist on sharing the stage. My general rule is that almost anything that a university president has to say as an introduction is  ceremonial and mainly geared towards providing a good photo-op for  students and parents. Let me rewrite every single introductory speech so that it accomplishes that purpose in as painless manner as possible:

    Hi, I’m President Nagle of Pendelton State University. I can’t wait to hear this talk. It’s gonna be great! I asked  PSU prof Vincent Strudwick to say some  words before the talk begins. See ya!

    The Dean can give a variation of the same speech. Here’s another idea. If you’re sitting onstage just for the sake of appearances, try to have enough courage to refrain from talking.   Making an appearance does NOT mean you are obligated to make a speech.

    Third, another rationalization for making long intros is  that it reduces the need for the featured speaker to spend time  plugging his books.   Presumably it seems gauche for the featured speaker to do a sales pitch, and so the person making the  introduction can take care of the crassly commercial sales pitches.  As  sympathetic as I am  to this motive, good speakers already know how to insert casual and non-irritating  mentions of their latest books. Yes, I as an audience member probably would like to hear the title of the speaker’s latest (or most important) book, but often it suffices  to see the title listed on a slide.   Actually, if  a speaker is engaging enough,  I’m probably going to look up his books anyway.

    Finally, I want to express admiration for what is called the “cold open” in show business. It can work tremendously well. My favorite example of this was a joint presentation by Bruce Sterling and Cory Doctorow at 2002 South by Southwest (summarized here).  My memory of the event may be a little foggy (and I sat in the back of the room), but remember no intros at all — two  cool and well-informed people just started jabbering  away on topics of interest. It blew my mind because 1)both guys were talking fast and extemporizing, 2)clearly their thoughts were original and interesting (and well-thought out), and 3)neither person seemed to care about selling their personal  brand or pimping their book-like projects. They were just having fun.  And the audience was having fun too.

    I wish more people would do that. Imagine that Socrates were going to speak at your university. Which kind of opening would engage you more:

    OPTION 1: INTRODUCER

    Socrates is a controversial philosopher who has been gaining a lot of fame in intellectual circles. The Athens Times wrote that “Socrates is a bold and impressive thinker who has devised a new method for testing the validity of philosophical ideas” and the oracle at Delphi said there was no man who was wiser than Socrates. But Socrates is best known for being portrayed satirically in the comic  plays of Aristophanes.  Recognized for his heroism in saving the life of Alcibiades, Socrates is also a war hero and  is best known for a philosophic method of inquiry called  the “Socratic method.”  Socrates has a reputation for asking unusual questions and has been in heavy demand as a speaker and teacher.  Indeed he has already attracted a lot of intellectual disciples and has at times been accused of corrupting the youth. So far, Socrates has not written any books, but books are already being written about him.  Thinker, rabble-rouser, provocateur or buffoon — you can decide. So now I present to you….Socrates — making his first appearance at Pendelton State University.

     

    Or maybe we can skip the formalities and let Socrates do a cold open:

    OPTION 2: SOCRATES

    “Is it always better to tell the truth to someone close to you even if you know it causes pain?”

     

    So I ask you: Which kind of beginning    would engage you more?

     

    ****************************************

    A funny thing. After giving a lukewarm assessment about TEDX Houston, I later learned that one of the talks by Brene Brown, (a  UH Professor  for Social Work) had become extremely popular. That’s good because really it was the only talk with a memorable idea as the thesis. Of course, she speaks from the Ivory Tower (news flash: all professors come up with interesting ideas!), but fundamentally I enjoyed the talk because of what she said, not because of the academic credentials she had accumulated.

     

  • My 2006 South by Southwest Journal (Very long)

    Every March between 2002 and 2010 I regularly attended an Austin tech conference called South by Southwest Interactive. In 2006 I offered  to TechBlog to blog about my misadventures at SXSW. I generally liked that experience although it kind of ruins the fun of attending the conference. Some of the tidbits are dated now (but some are definitely not!) . I’m reposting the whole thing for archiving purposes.

    (more…)

  • Novel in 2050 Plan B (SXSWi 2010) Sunday March 14 at 2:00 PM

    Final Update: We did the panel (official URL here), and it was great! We hope it will go on podcast eventually, and I’ll post it here. See the panel hashtag #novel2050 .

    Update: We will be repeating this session on Monday at 11:00 AM in an honest-to-god SXSW room. For some reason, it’s not on the official schedule yet. Details forthcoming very soon!

    I regularly attend South by Southwest Interactive every spring. I noticed that one of the proposed panels by Richard Nash was called the Novel in 2050. A description:

    Description:
    Research shows reading a book for as little as six minutes may cut stress levels in half. But have Twitter-length attention spans decreased demand for novels? What is the future of the “non-networked” book? This panel will debate the relevance of novels in a networked world.
    Questions  Answered:

    1. Will novels exist in 2050? What will they look like?
    2. Have modern Twitter-length attention spans decreased interest in novels?
    3. How might crowdsourcing and collaboration contribute to the creation of a novel?
    4. What are some recent examples of networked books?
    5. Are young people reading novels?
    6. Does a novel communicate differently on a Kindle, iPhone, or other electronic device?
    7. Is the Internet more of a threat to publishing than film or television were in the 20th century?
    8. Why is technology mostly absent in the plots of contemporary novels?
    9. How might novels use games and cross-platform storytelling?
    10. What about novels should be preserved? What needs to change?

    I thought it was a brilliant topic, and (as I predicted last summer), it was voted down.

    However, I still thought the topic worth pursuing anyway, and in fact there’s no law forbidding writerly types from arranging an informal get together to discuss Novel in 2050/Future of the Novel/Future of Storytelling.

    One ironic thing about SXSW is that even though the panels showcase web design, marketing, technology, gaming, etc, quite a number of writers end up showing up anyway to see what the fuss is about.   Sometimes they are blogging the conference or performing at Fray Cafe or pretending to be web designers or showing up at the publishing panel to complain about the publishing world or peddling spime.  A few years ago,  the Associated Writing Programs was having their annual conference at the same week and location as SXSW;  almost nobody who attended  AWP had ever heard of SXSWi (and vice versa).  That was sad.

    One thing I liked about Richard Nash’s  proposed panel is that it was purely speculative and did not concern business plans or technology platforms or marketing analysis or how to monetize things.  It’s just about genre and literary possibilities.  I guess sci fi writers are better at prognostication than people like myself; nonetheless I think all literary types have ideas about what the future will bring and what storytelling forms will prevail and what will happen to the dear old writer in the meantime.

    So then, I have decided to organize an informal panel about the topic anyway, with the blessing of Richard Nash (who will be presenting at another more practical panel  about marketing to subcultures on Sunday).  Mr. Nash probably won’t be able to make this informal panel, but that’s ok;  we’ll manage without him.  It won’t be a panel in the sense that there will be microphones and name plates. Instead it will be more like a core conversation where a Bunch of People Sit Around and Discuss Things (BOPSAADT).

    Time: Update: We may repeat this as a semi-official panel on Monday at 11:00 . Awaiting details. Stay tuned.

    Location: Main Convention Center,  3rd floor, large open area at the end of hallway and close to Room 10A and 10B . It’s close to the elevators and a set of double doors and could easily accommodate 2-20 people.  (See Update 4)

    Contact Information: robertdotnagle @fastmailbox.net

    RSVP: not necessary, but if you plan to attend, it would be nice to add a comment on this post. Also, if you have an ideas for how to steer this session, feel free to suggest it below.  Important Note: if you put you include your email on the comment form, I will drop you a line Saturday line when I have a definite room.

    Finally, a quote from author Jack Matthews about the impact of technology on literature:

    Will any conceivable sort of electronic gadgetry prove useful in understanding the subtleties of language and custom implicated in the works of Anthony Trollope or Henry James? Could anybody seriously argue that the availability of such electronic means would have enlarged or enriched their own clear and complex vision of life? … The electronic revolution has done nothing to invalidate the old truths, just as it has not provided any new means for exposing any of the old idiocies that have permeated and probably always will permeate the human condition.

    Update 1: Richard Nash says he will be there. Check out Richard Nash’s insightful interview he gave to Oreilly last month.

    Update 2: I dub the twitter hashtag  novel2050planb the official hashtag for this event.

    Update 3 (Thur AM). Assuming that more than 2 or 3 people show up, I’ll make a recording of the event. I’ll also look into having a conference call if there is serious interest.

    Update 4 ( Sat 3:00 PM). Apparently finding an empty room is harder than expected. (They are piping in keynotes into all the usual rooms and the one offsite place I know about was booked).  So I’ve found a very informal meeting space,  on 3rd floor very close to Room 10A or 10B.  (In the hallway, there is a wide open space by the double doors and the elevator).  It’s relatively quiet/isolated; we’d have to camp out on the floor, and there’s an outlet (and I can bring a power chord).  It’s a big space; it could easily accommodate a medium sized discussion group of 2-25 people.   I’ll put up signs.  Please note: although I don’t expect this location to change, you probably should check this or twitter for updates. (I’ll put up a sign on this informal area if it changes.

    Update 5  (Sun 3:30) We may do a repeat of this session as a “official” panel in an actual SXSW room on Monday at 11:00 AM. Awaiting details.

  • Alas, I’ve decided to become a protester (for a day)

    A week ago I hemmed and hawed about whether I should attend a Houston political protest about bank bailouts.  Normally I never do these kinds of things (even though protests seems as natural to many progressives as going to church is for conservatives).

    Here’s meeting info if you’re interested. Saturday at 1:00 PM.

    Just for variety, I am going to attend…maybe to meet people, see what’s going on. Maybe I’ll even give a yell or two. Seriously, I will have no idea what to do. Maybe I’ll snap a photo and catch up on RSS feeds on my PDA. I don’t know.

    Seriously, though, what impressed me about this protest was the well-written mission statement.

    It’s not enough to patch up the current system. We need to restrict the ways that bankers can lobby and serve in the government. We need to prohibit compensation plans that encourages huge short-term risk. We have to break up any bank that’s "too big to fail" so that we can have a functional free market. We need serious reform that fixes the root causes in our political and economic system: excessive influence of banks, dangerous compensation systems, and massive consolidation that does nothing to serve the public interest. We must have an independent regulatory body that protects consumers against usury and predatory lending and shuts down any industry behavior that poses a systemic risk to our financial system.

    By the way, on the same day (tomorrow)  I’ll also be attending Freelancecamp, an all-day event at the Houston Technology Center.

  • Dilemma: Should I attend South by Southwest Interactive Conference in March?

    Frankly, I’m deadlocked. I’ve been attending South by Southwest Interactive since 2002. Should I go for the 7th year in a row?

    I’ve changed my mind about 20 times, and frankly, I expect to change it 10 more times. I need to make a decision before January 15 (that’s when the price goes up $25 to $425).

    Here are my thoughts.

    Reasons Not to Go.

    1. It’s getting more expensive.
    2. People are getting younger, and older people seem less relevant to the discussion. Even last time, I felt like a spectator to many of the panel topics. I find any subject interesting (up to a point). But does my opinion really count?
    3. My ability to process new technologies and ideas is limited. In 2006, I wrote a diary of going to SXSW which captured the creativity and brainstorming of a conference. That was fun (although exhausting). But over time, the buzz of being exposed to these ideas was tempered by the fact that I could not try out or play with most of the ideas I had been exposed to. Ok, so I attended a panel on video podcasting. That’s great. But what about actually trying it yourself? Unfortunately an ordinary geek’s free time is limited, especially with work and family getting in the way. It can get depressing because it calls attention to how much more I can and should be doing. Instead, I should be spending my free time doing it. It’s a kind of bait shop for smart people. Tempting, but unattainable.
    4. Same old people. Same old ideas. Even though SXSW and the attendees are interesting, after a while, a sort of groupthink occurs. (Time-Warner bad, twitter good, freelancers are good, full time workers are bad. Enterpreneurship is good, service (i.e., notprofit or government) jobs are bad. SXSW has/had a lot of web designers. Yes, that’s interesting, but only so many people can be Jeffrey Zeldman or Matt Mullenweg. These are niches, but to make a name for yourself, you have to identify alternate niches.
    5. Do I really matter? (The question of status). Some Internet celebrities show up here, and many have remarkable stories to tell. But noncelebrities have stories to tell also, but who cares about them really? The minor figure of one year when he shows up the following year can be an Internet celebrity (or the multimillionaire) of the next. But the definition of success seems to become narrower and more affiliated with the company you work for (or the major media company who backs you). By my personal standard, these definitions don’t really matter.
    6. Switch conferences once in a while. At this point I’d love to go to a totally different conference. A conference for executives or elementary school teachers, or Southern writers or marketing whizzes. My rule about conferences: always go to conferences where I am likely to know the least about a subject.
    7. I attended a great seminar about web usability where they talked about successful brainstorming. One key element to brainstorming, the speaker mentioned, was ensuring a diversity of viewpoints on the team. Rather than having 4 TV writers on a team, it was more helpful to have a TV writer, a doctor, a student and a restaurant manager.
    8. 4 days of time I could be writing/making websites/learning a technical skill. Unfortunately, companies are stingy about letting individuals learn things. If it’s not directly related to the task at hand, it is often difficult for the worker to learn anything. More progressive companies try to combat that problem by sending people to conferences. But doing that misses a vital part of training: having the time to learn a skill on your own. Two years ago I took a programming class. Great class, enjoyed it a lot. Afterwards, I had practically no time to experiment with what I was learning. I never was able to budget the time for this (for various reasons) So I never learned it. Therein lies the folly of wasting your free time to go to conferences.
    9. Self-promotion. SXSW are often pros at self-promotion. I can tolerate it up to a point. But marketing is often more about style over substance. Often success is measured simply by monetization. Money, money, money: who cares? More specifically, many people have agendas. Don’t get me wrong. Agendas are good, not bad. But so often the panels focus on self-promotion and not on the substance (or the values) behind the message. They focus on look-how-I-implemented-this-idea and look-how-popular-it-got-and-how-pretty-it-looks.  There’s value in that; don’t get me wrong. Techniques to increase web traffic interest me to a point, but I’m more interesting in finding substance and meaning, not propagating it.
    10. It’s no longer about art. I enjoy the academic/artsy topics much more than the business topics. But every year the business topics predominate. Ironically some people from the bigger companies have the most academic approaches. I’ve seen presentations from people at Microsoft, Intel; interestingly, those have been the most academic/theoretical of them all.
    11. Age Discrimination. When I first attended SXSW in 2002, I felt ancient (I was 36). Now at 43, I am aware of my increasing irrelevance.
    12. Podcasts are cheaper than conference fees. Technical conferences have become great about sharing audio recordings of talks. But ironically, by doing this, it makes each panel less vital to attend. The advantage of podcasts is that if the subject doesn’t interest you, you just stop the recording and go to the next talk. This is not as easy to do at the actual event.
    13. The conference depends on the variety of programs. For better or worse, SXSW opened up the panel picking to a vote, which is good and bad. Bad in that it does boil down to a popularity contest. That makes it easier for bloggers to solicit votes and rewards in-your-face topics (even if the panels themselves are uninteresting).
    14. Lack of practical information. I once attended a panel on CSS, and the speaker turned it into a jokefest, imparting little useful information. (He was an accomplished web designer though). At the end I asked a serious question about standards, and he made a joke out of it. (The panel itself was more of an one man performance than an attempt to provide information). I remember thinking, what a #$##$# idiot. I almost never have a chance to hang out with web designers, and neither did about 50% of the people in the audience. We all cared about web design, but only about a quarter did full time work in the area. CSS was not something we much time to learn about. So then why was this prima donna mocking my attempt to make his session useful and practical? (Don’t get me wrong; he was funny and charming, just not useful).  Occasionally I learn some practical information (and most of it comes in the form of newer tools out there, and upcoming standards). Also, I learn  valuable process information.  But most sessions lack valuable how-to information. Ironically most of the education seems to be about legal issues and aesthetic issues, not technical ones.
    15. Not relevant to ME. Lots of information about web design and community management, but not a lot of information about publishing tools, editorial process, noncommercial arts projects. It’s great to be around great interesting people. But are they the kind of people whom I would pay money and time to go hang around for a few days?
    16. Why Not Go Bike Riding? I had a revelation last September in Ireland. I had a great time riding my bike. Surely, I could find biking opportunities (or exploring opportunities) while in Texas! Not only did it improve my body, it also cleansed my mind and helped me to think about things. In my normal life, so many trivial details clutter up. For example, at the moment, my top priority is finishing a literary essay which I promised for some online publication. But at the same time I am 1)coordinating time to take care of a sick family member, 2)doing online dating, 3)dealing with an ongoing credit card dispute, 4)transitioning to contract work, 5)handling mandatory backend stuff, 6)dealing with minor technical glitches, 7)making tough financial decisions and 8)dealing with housework. As a result, this top priority item has become an item I’ve hardly had time to work on. It is maddening! If I require the occasional escape from daily pressures, why not do something more personal (and less expensive?).

    Reasons to Go.

    1. Even though the price has increased, it provides reasonable access to lots of speakers and sessions. Occasionally, one or two of them are useful.
    2. Loneliness/Making Connections. Since I’m moving back to contract work, I need to make a special effort to widen my social network with face-to-face contact. Also, it’s a good way to keep in touch with people I met from previous years.
    3. What You Don’t Know. These sorts of conferences help you see things which are missing on your radar. Two or three times at every SXSW, I hear something startling and interesting, causing me to change how I do things. The trouble is, I can’t anticipate what startling information I will discover (if any).
    4. Finding out why people are embracing fads. I hear about a lot of cool web stuff with polite indifference. Facebook, hulu, etc. It’s often interesting to hear why some people are/were enthusiastic about facebook even though to me it seems like nothing special. Sometimes my first impressions about something can be way off base.
    5. Just showing up. Woody Allen once said that 95% of life is just showing up. If I want to maintain visibility in the blogosphere or whatever-osphere, I need to be around other people. Conversely, I probably learn about other bloggers/artists/etc. (That begs the question about why I don’t run into such people in Houston, but that’s another story).
    6. Business opportunities. One advantage of going to SXSW is finding out what ideas are being tried and which projects not to bother with. It helps to know about the competition.
    7. New Media Focus. One problem content creators have is not understanding the implications of new media on their own endeavors. For example, what about emerging copyright law? Business models? Advertising trends? If today you tried to implement  an ad-monetizing strategy that was popular in 2005, you would find little success.
    8. Tradition. After a while, the media geek celebrities who noticed that funny looking guy in the hallway will at some point find it unavoidable to converse with me.  It’s just a matter of time.
    9. Texas Contacts. I eventually will shift professions in the next 5 or 10 years. It’s always helpful to make contacts with people in different but related fields.

    So here are my thoughts for now. Since I have written this post, I have changed my mind three more times. I need to commit by January 15. What should I do?

    Update (January 15): Well, I’ve decided to go after all.  I will post afterwards about whether I thought it was worth it (in comparison to doing my own thing from home.  The reasons that persuaded me:  opportunities to tell acquaintances about my ebook projects, opportunity to perform a story at Fray, Core Conversations (an informal round table discussion), the need for a break from things (a big factor actually), and the chance to focus my training in the right direction.

    Update (2021 10 Years later).

  • Tellebration Storytelling Event: November 17 (Houston)

    What? Tellebration Storytelling Event

    When? Saturday November 17, 2:00 PM  (Important: Note the Changed Time!)

    Where? Dharma Cafe, 1718 Houston Avenue,Houston, Texas77007 (see website & map).

    Cost: (Includes Light Buffet/Coffee) $10 (HSG Members)/$12 (non-HSG guests)

    I’ll be not only attending the event, but I’ll also be telling a story. For more details about this event and other events put on by the Houston Storytellers’ Guild, check their website.

  • SXSW Interactive Price Increase

    Unfortunately, it looks like prices for SXSW Interactive have increased precipituously. Early bird rates have increased from $250 to $350.  Although this is merely acknowledging the popularity of the Interactive session, it will no longer seem as awesome a deal as it used to be. Still it’s good deal if you haven’t gone before.

    In other words, I’m still waiting to hear if a panel I proposed will be accepted. Yes, the fact that I include the URL after the voting is over indicates how unlikely that scenario will be.   I can’t predict whether I’ll be able to make it this year.

  • Gecko Gathering Saturday September 22, 2007

    Host: Brian Herod
    Location: Willow St. Pump Station, 811 N. San Jacinto, Houston, TX View Map and Photograph
    When: Saturday, September 22, 7:00pm
    Phone: 713-480-6303

    Website

    (I’ll probably be telling a story at this event. It should be lots of fun)

    From Brian’s announcement:
    Beginning in September, in the spirit of those geckos gathering, a unique Houston venue coupled with a special story theme will be announced monthly. Those interested in telling stories to the theme can contact Jay and Brian by e-mail and will be put on the program for the coming month. A new venue and theme will be announced at each Gecko Gathering.

    Geckos will be gathering to hear and tell stories on September 22, 2007, from 7:00-9:00 p.m. at the Willow Street Pump Station, 811 N. San Jacinto in downtown Houston. Stories will be spun around the theme “The Way of Water.” We drink it, we swim in it, we waste it; it comprises over 80% of our physical being. It will not only be served at our Gecko Gathering, it will serve as our story theme for the evening.

    Check the website for more information or to sign up to tell a story.

    Gecko Gathering, a new storytelling/spoken word venue in Houston, Texas, was inspired by New York City’s Moth. In the eyes of the producers, Gecko Gathering is intended to help re-energize the Houston Storytellers Guild in particular, and the storytelling community in general. By choosing a theme and coupling it with a unique venue we hope to atttract tellers who will share stories (original, literary, folk or personal) that share some truth or wisdom about how one “makes their way” in this world, so that listeners and tellers can learn and grow as a result of the story sharing process.

  • Ploneability Higher Education Workshop: November 7

    I’ll probably be attending the Ploneability Higher Education workshop at University of Houston on November 7.  Registration is free.

    I don’t work at a university per se, but my plone/ebook implementation should be relevant to people at the university.  Plus, I used to teach at a university in another life.

  • Barcamp Houston–Postscript

    Whew, I came back from Barcamp Houston. Exhausted.

    (work in progress. I’ve going to add comments later when I have more time). The talk went pretty well, but I’ve noticed that I usually put too much stuff in presentations. It’s hard to have a sense how long a presentation actually will be until you’ve done it a few times. Teachers often have a chance to repeat a lecture and do it within a time limit.

    There is a tendency for semi-geeks like myself to move the techie stuff to the end–which is unfortunate, because the information at the end of the talk tends to be more detailed and useful. I can’t tell you how often a talk has had general blather for 30 minutes, and then the meat of the talk comes in the last 3 minutes (and they were running short on time).

    Ebooks is a narrow and specialized topic not likely to interest a large number of people (even in this geek crowd). On the other hand, the general questions raised about reading do have universal applicability, and I feel I raised some good points.

    People who give technical talks basically have to choose between two things: do you wish your talk to be relevant (appealing to a general audience) or practical (appealing to a narrower audience)? More often that not, I end up going up the first path. For future talks, I want to try to give a talk of the second kind (practical).

    Robert Nagle, presenting at Barcamp Houston, 2007

    (I’m speaking about the nature of 9/11 coverage. Photo by Ed Schipul).

    Other observations (I’ll add to the list as I think of it).

    • In the initial Open Office presentation I prepared a diagram of the typical workflow for ebooks and when Gerry Manacso (my copresenter) saw it, he said, that’s not the way it’s done at all. He saw the ebook production process as centered around Adobe InDesign 3 (which is a typical PDF-centric and design-centric point of view), whereas I saw the process as centered around the xml database and xslt transformations (which is a typical technical writer point of view). Actually both points of view are wrong. Adobe Indesign is a $700 tool that no writer could afford (and smaller publishers will probably not be able to afford). An XML toolchain is less expensive, but more complicated and requires technical expertise (which most writers lack). Writers and small publishers can handle Openoffice/MS Office and simple HTML –but little more than that. Also, writers have figured out blogging software and using plugins. But even that may be unnecessary. It’s conceivable that future books will be uploaded via an online editor and then published to www.readyourebooksonline.com (like what Google Docs is trying to do). It’s also conceivable that simple freeware programs like BookDesigner may end up becoming the default tool of choice because it’s free and converts things easily.
    • In keeping with the Designer vs. Techie dichotomy, I spent my time putting my points in slides. There were typos and layout problems galore (I didn’t care; i could get to that later). Gerry on the other hand made a visually appealing presentation and ended up importing my slides into his own presentation program. Major help!
    • I particularly enjoyed the last talk about SEO with Ed Schipul and Steven Evatt of the Houston Chronicle. (Here are their presentation slides )
    • After my presentation, I thought of  another example to prove my point.  I recently read Michael Isikoff’s amazing book covering the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, Uncovering Clinton. It was amazing because it presented events in sequence and in depth (along with a lot of backstory). I had already read most of Isikoff’s articles and was a Lewinsky junkie (I downloaded the Starr report and had read the whole thing within hours of when it was released). And yet, the book presentation did more to depict the chain of events and the people involved than individual articles could. I’m beginning to think that the most misunderstood historical events are those which appear when we are adults. Because we follow the events on a daily basis, we lose perspective and often lose a sense of the timeline. Even the best reports fail to recognize significance in certain details or situations.
    • (other points to be included later).

  • Giving Readings

    Charlie Stross gives advance about how authors can give a public reading. To summarize, read a 25 minute story, then a shorter 15 minute story, then 5 minutes from something unpublished.

    That sounds good, but it’s really hard for a performer to be engaging for longer than 25 minutes, if only because the audience becomes fidgety. Another problem is that readings don’t have visual aids or accompanying audio.

  • SXSW Panel Picker

    Oops, I forgot to submit a panel idea to South by Southwest 2008. (I was doing to do something about ebooks, reading, etc). You can vote on the panels here.

    That’s okay. It wouldn’t have gotten picked anyway (it’s far more fun being in the audience anyway).

    However, I’m working on a really interesting presentation/panel for tomorrow’s Bar Camp Houston.

    Observation: with the open nomination system, I’ve noticed an awful lot of proposals from people working at big companies, especially Dell. When I attended SXSW in 2002-3, I barely came across anybody from Dell (which was strange of course, because they are a gigantic employer in Austin). This year, there are lots of panel ideas by Dell people.

    I can’t predict whether I’ll attend SXSW (I probably will), but I was toying around with the idea of attending a conference outside my area (Pubcon is one example). I remember attending a smaller game conference in Austin and found it terrifc.

  • Presentation (August 25): Optimizing for Reading: The Art and Science of Presenting Content

    This Saturday I’ll be giving a presentation with Gerry Manacsa at Barcamp Houston.

    (See my post-presentation wrapup here)

    Subject Optimize for Reading: the art (and science) of presenting content
    Date: August 25, 2007. Probably 10:00 AM. (There is no set schedule, but we’ll probably be presenting before noon).
    Location: Houston Technology Center
    Cost: Free! (as is attendance at Barcamp Houston).

    • Reading on the Web: Why It’s Awesome, Why It Sucks
    • The Agony (and Ecstasies) of Intensive Reading
    • Packaging Content (and implications for content creators)
    • How hardware is constraining (and liberating) the way we read
    • Ad-supported content (i.e., “How Not to Irritate Readers”)

    Robert Nagle is a Houston-based fiction writer and associate editor of TeleRead, a site about ebook technologies and publishing.

    Gerry Manacsa is a senior designer for Wowio Ebooks, a site that publishes and distributes free ad-supported ebooks. He is also a Houston resident.

    Recording/Notes I’ll try to record this session and make the mp3 available when I can. (I’ll post the URL here and possibly elsewhere when it’s ready). I’ll try to put the presentation up as well.

    Show and Tell : As an added bonus, we’ll have lots of reading gear, ranging from the low-tech to the high tech.

    By the way, feel free to say hi to me if you show up!

  • Presentation (August 25): Optimizing for Reading: The Art and Science of Presenting Content

    On Saturday August 25 I’ll be attending Barcamp Houston. . It’s located at the Houston Technology Center near midtown.

    I was going to give a presentation on ebooks, but instead, I’ve decided to give a presentation on a more general topic: Optimizing for Reading: The Art and Science of Presenting Content.

    Subjects covered will include: information & interface design, usability,  advertising vs. readability, hardware (ebooks), mobile reading, interactivity.
    There is no set schedule, but I’m really going to try to present before lunch. I will definitely make a podcast of this talk and will likely crosspost it at teleread.