>I've been to 3 SWFox conferences (2009, 2010, 2012). To me, there's an energy there that makes it all worth
>it. It is 3 to 4 days of pure fun and I get so excited to meet people FoxPro people and yap about software round
>the clock. Sure, I find plenty of great sessions, but hanging out with dozens of FoxPro peeps is the main reason
>to go.
>
>And, it's my opinion that's what drives the organizers also. (Just my opinion, as I certainly don't speak for them.)


I had someone post a similar response on another website regarding the excitement, the thrill of being there. I posted this reply there:

Personally, I believe the opportunity to reach out and share and learn and grow with/from the countless thousands (those whose voice today falls silent at events like this because of the many reasons contributing to their being unable to attend) whose desires to grow and share and learn and improve is equal to or exceedingly above any of ours, that the gain found in reaching those additional people more than justifies the hundred or so then missing out on some "at-event level excitement" that will leave a lasting memory. In fact I see it as no contest.

Consider that there's no reason why all the whitepapers can't be released publicly, why there can't be many keynote videos offered, why there can't be many presentations and samples given by anyone who wants to offer up what they have for all to inspect, view, and possibly learn from. Who knows who has the best ideas? The opportunity to share them all will reveal the talents God has bestowed in each of us, that we may be offering them back up to people everywhere.

All of it could be made public, disseminated online, with video presentations given by all, available for download, in multiple languages, with the ability to include transcripts or closed captioning, with a voting system and comments, the ability to post video responses as in an online forum, etc ... basically to include those many thousands who might want greatly to participate but simply can't. The only reasons not to make it like this are negative, dividing, the fact that it's not really about helping as many people as possible, but rather having an inner circle, a "club for the "haves" instead of "an opportunity for all."

You know, the more I think about it, the more this kind of event sound like nothing other than a clique, a division of "us" and "them" (those with the means to attend, and those without). Sure it's exciting. Sure it's informative. Sure it's a great many things which are positive. But all of that greatness rests upon the shoulders of those who can't attend for whatever reason, cutting them out. They see no benefit, only the obvious divisions.

This online presentation methodology of reaching as many people as desire to come will be something the Liberty Software Foundation will strive for. Greatly. And I would much rather give opportunities to the many to attend a somewhat less exciting online event, giving them the opportunity to participate and be an equal front-and-center partner in all aspects (they can include their own keynote address), than to ever hold a type of closed conference.

In short: I'd rather see the thousands who are unable to attend having the chance to share in and become a piece of what they're missing, rather than keeping it all hoarded away internally for those who could/would attend. The benefits possible in reaching out to all greatly outweigh the individual gains possible to the few at a "more exciting event".