We are rapidly approaching PodcampCT and if you are quick, you may still be able to register for the early bird reduced price. As we approach the day, the discussions continue to flourish about exactly what PodcampCT should be like.

Podcamps come out of the unconference tradition, and back in March when we first started planning PodcampCT, I wrote:

I often comment about being an unconference purist. Every session should be a discussion with a facilitator and note taker, but no presentations.

This perspective ended up being reflected in the How It Works section of the PodcampCT website.

I wrote more about this in Understanding Unconferences in July as we approached Social Web Week in Connecticut. In that post, I talked about Joe Cascio's metaphor of a Podcamp as a pot luck conference, and I added the metaphor of a Podcamp as a giant brainstorming session.

A couple weeks later, I wrote:What is the Difference Between a Good Podcamp and a Great Podcamp? In it, I said

A good podcamp is one where everyone comes away having learned something new...
A great podcamp is one where people discover ideas that haven’t been thought about before.

I've been pretty consistent in my belief about the value of discussions over presentations. Unfortunately, this has, at times, rubbed experienced presenters the wrong way. In August, I wrote, What Makes for a Good Podcamp Session?. I referred to a session idea about personal branding in social media. Or maybe the session idea was about building audience or about citizen journalism. The problem was that to many of the people on the planning list, it sounded like a sales pitch.

I made a snarky suggestion, How to avoid pitches and presentations at podcamp. Unfortunately, the person who came up with the idea took affront to the comments from people on the list and spoke as if maybe the PodcampCT crew wasn't ready to learn from his wisdom.

I didn't jump in at the time, feeling it was better just to let things rest, but I do want to learn from his wisdom. I just want to make sure that it is as rich a learning experience as possible, and not a dry presentation or sales pitch where I wouldn't get as much of a chance to learn. He has since signed up to attend and I hope that he can find ways to share his knowledge with the other participants, including me.

Today, the same issue blew up again. One possible presenter mentioned that she was working on a Powerpoint presentation about a topic. Members of the list then talked about whether we had said Powerpoint presentations would be allowed. One member of the list contacted the possible presenter and said she liked the session idea but that Powerpoint presentations are not allowed. This resulted in some nasty messages back and forth about how the presenter felt that not allowing PowerPoint presentations was tacky, that the best sessions depended on strong presentations. She said she was rethinking whether she would participate. This resulted in a long discussion amongst the PodcampCT organizers where the team backed down a little bit about Powerpoint presentations. With that, I want to share two messages that I sent about this, slightly edited for the sake of this blog post.

The first was in response to a message urging the team to allow presentations, referencing the history and the rules of Podcamp. I wrote:

As a person who strongly supports the no presentation recommendation, let me provide a few comments.

PodCamp(TM) as a concept of Chris Brogan and his friends may not have any rules against presentations, and in fact, might even encourage them. It is part of the reason I exercise the rule of two feet and avoid various camps that seem to encourage presentations.

podcamps, as an outgrowth of barcamp, unconferences and open space technology, are based on discussions instead of presentations where new ideas emerge through the sharing of information instead of a presenter's old ideas being presented as new ideas to the audience.

Yes, that is two very different views of podcamps. I go to the latter, and try to avoid the former.

In terms of the six rules of PodCamp(TM), I'll start off with the first rule:

"All attendees must be treated equally. Everyone is a rockstar."

In my experience, presentations set up a power dynamic which is contrary to the idea that all attendees are treated equally. Presenters are treated differently than their audience. That, in and of itself, is enough of a reason to avoid presentations.

A similar concern comes up with

"All attendees must be allowed to participate."

While I don't rule out that a good presenter, and perhaps the presenter falls in this category, finds ways of making sure that all attendees are allowed to participate. Too often I've seen presentations done in such a way that it does not allow all attendees to participate. Because of this, while there might be limited times when a presentation does not violate the rules of
PodCamp(TM), I believe it is the exception that needs to be handled very carefully.

As a final note, I return to the rule of two feet. While the presenter is probably mature enough to be able to handle a presentation that will not get trampled by the rule of two feet, and not have her feelings bruised, too often I've seen presenters have their feelings bruised and write nasty
screeds when they don't get to do their presentation their way. The best way to prevent this is to strongly discourage any presentations.

All of that said, whoever comes are the right people and whatever happens is the right thing. If the presenter, or anyone else, comes and tries to do a presentation, I will not stop her. However, if I'm in that session, I will walk out, and perhaps encourage others to do the same.

What is the best way of making sure that all the sessions meet the goals of PodCamp(TM)? My view is to very strongly discourage presentations. At the same time, as a fan of the emergent, I would not ban them.

I have a lot more to say on this, but for now I need to be brief. I'm running out to a meeting.

While I was out at the meeting, several emails went back and forth, and a person contacted the person who wanted to make the Powerpoint presentation to say something like Powerpoint presentations would be allowed, but discouraged.

One person in the conversation suggested that perhaps I appreciate the conversational aspect of unconferences because I already know the basic topics being covered at the unconference, but that others less acquainted with the subject matter would benefit from presentations.

I believe this actually gets at the crux of why I am so strongly opposed to presentations. Here is the message, modified for this blog post I sent to that:

I realize that decisions have been made and the conversation has moved on. So, to a certain extent, my comments at this might might be moot.

However, as was mentioned here, "The tone you set for PCCT1 will set the tone for all future PCCTs" and I believe that we are getting at a core aspect of unconferences.

The comments to me about being a veteran and not needing to cover the basics seems to reflect on the core underlying issue. He seems to be operating from the assumption that the best way to learn the basics of a topic is through a presentation instead of through a conversation.

It is not an uncommon belief. Much of the American education system is based on this premise, what is often called in educations circles, "The Sage on the Stage". However, it is a belief that I think is flawed and results in many of the problems we face in our country. I believe this belief damages our political systems, our media ecology and many other aspects of our lives together.

It is a belief that is challenged by the underlying principals of unconferences. Instead of learning best from a sage on the stage, I believe, in a constructivist educational framework, that we learn best by doing. In terms of creating social media, we learn best by having a conversation about social media, because that is, at its core, what good social media is, a conversation.

So, no, for beginner sessions, I believe the best approach is not a sage on the stage doing a presentation, but a bunch of people sitting around together having a discussion about what has worked and what hasn't for them when they were beginners mixed together with questions that those who haven't even begun to use social media might have. It is my belief that in
these sorts of conversations everyone has a greater potential to learn.

They also wrote "A lot of people are intimidated by PodCamp's tenet that everyone is expected to participate in some form or another, to present or facilitate a session. Most people are scared to death to talk in front of a group, let alone present to a group."

I believe that is unfortunate collateral damage of educational systems, whether they be public schools, professional conferences, or even events trying to be an unconference but relying on presentations.

I believe that the best way to confront this is to create a safe environment, like an unconference, where everyone is given the opportunity and encouragement to talk in front of a group. Afterall, the ability to talk in front of a group is also core to being successful at social media.

So, these are my current reflections on Podcamps. I realize that I have a different perspective on this than many. I challenge those who wish to come and do presentations to try and grow, to try and step out of their comfort zone and join in a conversation about their area of expertise instead of hiding behind Powerpoint slides.

As a final note, one of the beauties of unconferences is that whomever comes are the right people and whatever happens is the best thing that could happen. I am sure this will be the case of PodcampCT, no matter how set some people are on making or avoiding presentations.

Sign up today!