From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Gavin M(dot) Roy" <gmr(at)myyearbook(dot)com> |
Cc: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Dan Langille" <dan(at)langille(dot)org>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "PostgreSQL Advocacy" <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PGCon 2008 RFP |
Date: | 2009-01-05 19:25:12 |
Message-ID: | 36e682920901051125w2eb6c629v77dd487316ddb3d@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Gavin M. Roy <gmr(at)myyearbook(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2009-01-05 at 13:47 -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:If you need a
>> standardized template to get your message across in a
>> useful way then you are likely not someone who should be doing public
>> speaking in the first place.
>>
>
> Personally, the only argument I see for standardization is it makes the
> conference feel more professional. Having been to a fair amount of
> conferences, I'm more impressed by the ones that put an emphasis on the
> polish of the event, matching collateral materials (logos, signage, etc).
> Obviously content is king, but second to content is how the content is
> conveyed, the design image of a conference.
>
Agreed. The goals of conference organizers, among other things, are to put
on a good conference and to hopefully grow the conference for the next
year. The "polish" makes the conference feel more professional and also
helps get buy-in from mangement that it's a serious event rather than a
little user-group conference. That buy-in does matter when you're trying to
get mangement to pay for conference registration and the travel expense.
> I'm not sure why the argument is not about image.
>
Agreed.
> It rather seems to be about the quality of a presenter and if a present
> needs/doesn't need standardization.
>
It seems to be mostly the presenters who are complaining :)
> There is no reason why a standard slide deck template can't encompass all
> different slide layouts. Think of it like letterhead for the conference.
>
Agreed. This is generally standard fare.
> The most compelling reason I've heard for non-standard templates is the
> wide variety of presentation tools (or lack of presentation tools)that
> people use.
>
Yeah... not to sure how we'd help Bruce with his LaTeX slides :)
--
Jonah H. Harris, Senior DBA
myYearbook.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2009-01-05 19:29:53 | Re: PGCon 2008 RFP |
Previous Message | Selena Deckelmann | 2009-01-05 19:22:07 | Re: PGCon 2008 RFP |