I have a lot of respect for Dave Winer as a programmer, technologist, and tech pioneer, but I’m losing respect for Dave on the human front. Look, Gnomedex this year was a bit of an experiment, a departure from the usual. This came straight from Chris himself. No, I didn’t enjoy all the speakers this year. However I don’t enjoy all the speakers at any conference I go to–and if you’re honest with yourself, neither do you.
I think Dave is pissed that Chris didn’t ask him to speak this year and that, I think, set the stage for the spat between him and Jason Calacanis. Okay, we thought that was over and done with. Guess not:
The opening keynote speaker, Robert Steele, was a total disaster, completely inappropriate, insulting to our intelligence, and way off-topic. He rushed through his complex slides, strung together countless buzzphrases into non-sentences, never completed a thought, and made it clear he wasn’t even taking questions, much less disagreement (and how could you disagree with a presentation that never bothers to make a point). The guy looked and sounded like a poor man’s Rush Limbaugh. I thought for a while maybe he was a joke, a parody, a comedian, but you don’t make your opening speaker of a conference you care about a joke.
The presentation on Open Money was equally confusing and insulting, the speaker refused to even define the concept. And in the end, after supposedly explaining a revolutionary system of finance, he had the gall to ask us for the old kind of money that he was theoretically finished with. It was laughable.
[snip]
If Gnomedex is to continue, it must get back on track, it must reflect our interests, the audience’s interests. Chris is a great entertainer, and a warm human being, but his vision of the political and economic future is not something I share, or would find interesting to discuss.
Chris may choose to run a conference about his political views, but I have a choice too, when I go to political conferences, they reflect my interests. I go to Gnomedex to meet other bloggers and discuss what’s happening in the blogosphere. It shouldn’t be hard to program that, we can help, if asked. Source: Critique of Gnomedex 2007 (Scripting News)
Well Dave now you’re going to need to add Robert Steele and Michael Linton to the list of people you have to apologize to post-Gnomedex. I spent hours in the car with Michael before and after Gnomedex. He is a warm, engaging, funny, passionate, and smart man. I didn’t get a chance to talk with Robert Steele, but sure I didn’t agree with him 100%…but you can’t say he didn’t make you think.
Look, Chris and Ponzi care deeply about Gnomedex. You, Dave, know it, I know it. This was a huge risk for them. Was it 100%? Nope. I still had a blast. I still enjoyed a lot of the talks. I still plan on being there next year. Sure, I hope next year is different than this … but that’s good isn’t it? We don’t want Gnomedex to be the same old stale thing. I loved the Ignite talks. I love Ronni Bennett’s perspectives. Derek on screen very nearly made me weep.
If next year is half as thought-provoking as this, it’s well worth the price of admission.
Update 1:30 PM PDT: First to clarify, I am not doubting Dave’s humanity. I have the greatest respect for Dave’s technical contributions to the blogosphere. I am commenting, and disagreeing with, this post and how he is characterizing this past Gnomedex. Second, when I stated that I thought Dave was upset that Chris and Ponzi didn’t ask him to speak…it was conjecture. I had no knowledge then if he was or wasn’t. Dave says he wasn’t, so there it is.
Update Aug 22, 2:20 PM PT: Chris posted his post-Gnomedex thoughts. Good conversation there too.
Technorati Tags: Gnomedex, Gnomedex2007, Dave Winer, Chris Pirillo, Ponzi Pirillo, Michael Linton, Robert Steele, Ronni Bennett
August 21st, 2007 at 11:59 am
When you factor out all the ad hominems in this post, basically you disagree with my review, so why can’t you just say that and skip the critique of me as a human being? Doesn’t that strike you as a bit godlike, are you really in a position to judge another person’s humanity??
In any case, the only factual error you made is saying that I must have wanted to speak at Gnomedex. In fact I didn’t want to speak, didn’t ask to, wasn’t asked to, and was glad not to be speaking. I paid my fee and waited until things settled down to say my piece aobut the conference itself.
It’s great that you enjoyed it. I hope you do go back and enjoy it next year. I never said it was a bad idea to take some risks. But I also would be resmiss if I didn’t say what I had to say about the conference, that’s kind of the spirit of blogging. Have you ever seen the acronym YMMV. It applies here, and implies a certain humility that isn’t in your post.
No apologies coming to the speakers. The ones I called out I thought were terrible. I didn’t say anything during the talks, because neither of them allowed it, and I decided not to talk. But I never said I wouldn’t comment on my blog.
Anyway, hope you find it in your heart to give my humanity another chance.
Peace…
August 21st, 2007 at 12:54 pm
[…] Tris Hussey defends Gnomedex, questions my honesty and value as a human. […]
August 21st, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Tris, I completely disagree with you on this. There is a difference between having boring tech talks in a tech conference and having boring political talks in a tech conference. As Dave himself pointed out, you could have one talk on the political topic and that too not as Keynote talk. I also felt that it was more like a conference with a political agenda and entirely different from last years one I watched. I was planning to attend from next year onwards. I hope Chris ensures that this is not repeated. The election fever is going to be a bit high during the next Gnomedex.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:22 pm
Dave, I’m sorry if you took what I said to mean that I doubt your humanity. I don’t doubt your humanity. Never have. I have great respect for all that you’ve done for the blogosphere.
And as far as you not talking, I said “I think” because that is my perception. Don’t know if you were or not. It’s opinion.
You have yours I have mine.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Tris, some things are worth having an opinion about and other things are just ridiculous. To have an opinion about what someone else thinks, when they’re right there and you can ask them, is in the latter category.
I just told you I didn’t want to speak. If you think I’m lying (obviously you do) why don’t you check with Chris or Ponzi and see if they remember me asking to speak.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Dave, I don’t think you’re lying, I believe you no worries, and I’ll edit the post now to make that clear. At the point in time I wrote the post … I didn’t know.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Now maybe we’ve dispensed with most of the extra stuff, there’s one more thing. Chris and Ponzi have been, imho, catching *too many* breaks. I’ve never seen any criticism of Gnomedex editorial decisions, in the years I’ve been going. Maybe I missed it, but if I did there’s not very much.
But there’s always been something of a back channel, and this year it was very active. I heard a lot of displeasure from a lot of people. Now maybe more of it will come out, or maybe I’ll be one of a very small number. That’s a risk I was willing to take, because I care.
There’s a “baby squirel” effect going on here — that’s what people used to call Ben and Mena Trott of Six Apart. A much-loved couple that people are reluctant to criticize.
But do you think I’d be doing them a favor by not coming next year, and jsut saying nothing — or trying to do something to get the conference back on track, centered where it says its centered — on the blogosphere.
I think they ought to draw from the audience, I think you ought to be asked to speak Tris, and you ought to explain what you learn from this thread. I hope you hear from a lot of other people in this process, I hope people disagree with both of us. And I hope you see that discourse that gets personal is the worst kind. I get bashed so much, I’m so sick of it, maybe you’ll get a little taste of what it’s like and maybe you’ll stop and think next time you say something mean about someone else.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Tris, thanks for accepting my word about what I think.
Now I don’t think it’s a great idea to edit the post. What we’re talking about here is discourse, and I think this is useful. We all make mistakes, nothing wrong with that, what would be wrong is not to learn from them.
I took a graphic snapshot of the post in case you do edit it, so this thread makes sense.
http://tinyurl.com/3xja4z
August 21st, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Dave, thank you for taking a screenshot. I do edit typos, but I added to the post as a time-stamped addendum. I guess I’m still an academic at heart.
I’d love to speak at Gnomedex, but of course after the stress of a public masters degree defense … public disagreement with me at Gnomedex, isn’t so bad.
I also stand corrected at not living up to my personal guide of not attacking people personally, so I humbly apologize to you Dave.
To extend this discussion. I wonder if by having non-tech speakers at a tech conference helps us broaden our horizons and inspire us. Many of the greatest minds were inspired by things completely outside their usual sphere of interest.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:01 pm
Tris
I think your comments are perfectly fine. Who knows where Winer’s coming from with that ad hominum stuff (truth be told, i’ve seen quite a few personal attacks against other people on his site.) Anyway, you have nothing to apologize. You were honest and offered your criticism in a spirit of openness with an idea toward furthering more dialogue about the future of a conference you care about. So more power to you!
If certain people prefer to keep this pot boiling, I prefer not to engage. It’s just not a useful way to spend my time.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:12 pm
Tris,
I also disagree with you here. Dave has posted on his blog about the good talks and things he liked about Gnomedex. I’d refer you to one of the posts he made after the conference.
http://www.scripting.com/stories/2007/08/12/aTravelDay.html
But he is will within his rights to point out which speakers weren’t up to par too. Doing so shouldn’t imply he has ulterior motives or is pissed he didn’t speak at the conference. If you followed the live chat or the twittering that was going on during the talks you’d see he isn’t alone in his assessment.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:25 pm
Tris: I disagree with you. On the points that Dave Winer made I agree with him. I thought that the speaker choices this year were the worst that Gnomedex has ever made and Dave is FAR from being the only one who has said that to me.
I really hope that next year’s is much better and that Chris gets back to Gnomedex’s roots. Celebration of technology and putting users at the center. Let’s go back to that and then I’ll be happy again.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:40 pm
I’ll say one thing for sure, if Chris wanted to spark discussion and debate via Gnomedex he succeeded!
I think, from chatting with Chris, that Gnomedex 8 will be different yet again … and we’ve given him more than a bit of feedback on what we’d like to see at the conference.
Guess we’ll just have to wait until next year to find out!
August 21st, 2007 at 6:45 pm
This banter is worse than HS.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:19 pm
It is good to see Scoble and Winer talk about what Gnomedex roots are. I have been the last three years and have steadily been losing track with what it’s undergirding theme is supposed to be. Now I know.
That being said, I did enjoy it overall and hope to build friendships there in the future and to get into some controversy. I like open debate and believe that Gnomedex is at it’s healthiest when speakers are challenged and ideas are refined by fire. Dave, come back again for that reason alone.
One thing that I have not seen mentioned so far here… There was almost a direct call from the speakers not to be challenged or questioned this year. I felt that was a bit chilling to the atmosphere.
Anyone agree?
August 21st, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Andrew, that’s a great point about being challenged. I think I would agree some folks weren’t expecting more than softball questions being tossed their way. As for me … I welcome a good debate and challenge when I speak. I know I don’t have all the answers so I love to hear other people’s perspectives…even if I don’t agree with them, they make me think.
August 21st, 2007 at 8:18 pm
Holy cow! Much ado about Gnomes!
I didn’t attend this year IN PERSON as I had last year, but followed the best I could on Twitter and Ustream. I sat beside Dave at last year’s Gnomedex and I know Tris pretty well.
First, while I strongly disagree with Dave’s outburst last year to Blake Ross then learning about the same happening this year with Jason Calanis (an issue apparently now closed), I have to say I would still agree with many of Dave’s criticisms of the conference. The money paid IS an issue and I see no reason why it shouldn’t be in the $30-$50 dollar range (like Northern Voice) rather than $500. That being said, it IS a user based conference which should accommodate a “bottom up” structure from users - like an unconference or barcamp. This was a criticism I had last year and it seems to have become even worse.
Chris has even said anyone coming to the Gnomedex to pitch their products will get kicked in the shins. Certainly no bruises at this year’s conference!
That being said, Dave’s unhappiness with poor presentations, presenters or topics becomes amplified, possibly to the point of becoming personal.
That, I believe, was not his objective, except to say Chris and Ponzi themselves still are ultimately responsible for everything at the conference and HAVE NOT BEEN HELD ACCOUNTABLE for personal reasons (this point I REALLY agree with, even with my own personal like for them).
On the other hand, possibly specifically due to Dave’s public personal attacks with SO MANY PEOPLE, Tris has articulated what many people already say - Dave doesn’t make himself accountable or puts himself “above” the crowd because of his online achievements. I certainly saw that last year and continue to see it in every “personal” situation Dave is in. No other person in the tech field attracts more attention in this regard than Dave.
Tris is NOT calling Dave inhuman. Dave is wrong to say that. Dave is just a VERY sensitive person who does take EVERYTHING personally. Period. Even Tris’ article. I think Tris is saying enough with the personal stuff, let’s look at the value the conference provided on it’s own merit, and not always look at who was nice and who was not nice.
Tris found value in Gnomedex where Dave didn’t. Dave wants Gnomedex to be a different conference. Is either of these gentleman wrong here?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:58 pm
“Dave Winer: Now I don’t think it’s a great idea to edit the post.”
*Head explodes*
August 22nd, 2007 at 3:06 am
[…] Tris Hussey 2. Shannon Clark 3. Dave Winer 4. Chris Pirillo 5. Scoble’s Tweets 6. Vanessa Fox 7. Ethan […]
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:49 am
I’ve been attending Gnomedex for three years (all Seattle) so I’m just as much a “veteran” as Dave. And I disagree with Dave and agree with Tris.
What’s important — what needs to be discussed — is not the technology but what technology enables people to do. Perhaps because I’d just finished the Wealth of Networks, I thought it was an excellent idea for Chris to bring people in to Gnomedex who were trying to “open up” things that most people haven’t given a single, much less second, thought to.
I wouldn’t come to the conference if it were just about blogging. But if it’s blogging as a metaphor for how the Web is changing, and how technologies are affecting society (and vice versa), and the tension between open-and-closed systems … then it’s the kind of event I want to attend. Heck, my first one wasn’t just blogging: Adam Curry was there talking about podcasting.
I didn’t like every speaker this year. I didn’t like every speaker in 2006 or 2005, either. So what? I feel good when I walk away from an event with one encounter (speaker or attendee) that causes me to look at the world differently. I can assure you that Robert Steele did that.
I probably should post this on Dave’s blog instead of here — but here goes: I found Dave’s ad hominem (Robert Steele = Rush Limbaugh) to be offensive. Limbaugh regularly makes things up (aka lying). He’s an entertainer. How can anyone compare him with someone who had a career in the Marines and the CIA and who is trying to shake up that world to do good (save $ and have better intelligence)?
I’m not saying Steele was a saint or that his was the “perfect” talk. But he made me think. And that’s what keynoters are supposed to do.
Steele sat behind me afterwards and we talked about a few things. He was conversational, not stand-offish. But his ego seemed right in line with the regulars at Gnomedex who, from the audience, shout down speakers … when I asked him if he wanted to know more about Lessig’s work on corruption (since corruption was one of Steele’s themes). C’est la vie.
Finally - how does anyone here know whether Gnomedex attendees give Chris and Ponzi private feedback about how the conference can be improved? All “criticism” doesn’t have to be public to be effective.
August 22nd, 2007 at 7:25 am
Hello, I’m a total outsider, in that I’ve never been invited to nor attended Gnomedex. I got to this page through Dave Winer’s blog.
I just want to say that the blogging community in general and to a lesser extent the “Web 2.0″ community (if there’s one that can be described like that) are communities of very strong-minded but extremely sensitive individuals, and therefore discussions degenerate rapidly towards abnormal extremes.
In this case, if I were to only slightly caricature it, you have one guy saying “I went to a conference that generally is really good, and this year it kinda sucked. Speakers were so far off topic that I thought it was a joke for a while, and it was disappointing.”
Then you have someone else (don’t want to guess the gender, sorry) responding “Hey, you’re outta line, pal! You gotta apologize, you holier-than-thou speaker wanna-be.”
This response was childish to the extreme, worse even than the usual political fare. Kind of hard to beat if you ask me. But then again, nobody did.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:27 am
I’ve been attending Gnomedex for 3 years and will continue to go. I did wonder about the opening talk and the one on open money. Sure they may have caused some critical thinking on my part, but it was more of ‘is what this guy is talking about nuts or do I just not get?’
I sat in the back and watched more screens go to their own work than following the guy on the stage during those talks. Speakers with more ‘blog relevant’ topics had the audience engaged.
I’ll give Chris a lot of lattitude on who’s talking so I searched for what to pull from the the talks. On the first all I took was the important roll bloggers can play in influencing the government & public opinion and that bloggers can not give up in this regard. But that message could have come from somone offering some less ‘wild’ views. May be a great guy socially but question having him lead off. The open money I did not get at all.
Just my two cents but I would have loved to have speakers on roll of bloggers as citizen journalists. Great speakers available from USC, Poynter, or NYU on that. Also speakers as to how blogging is integrated into social media in general.
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:13 pm
I love the discussion here! Kevin … yes, I agree the NYT is doing amazing stuff with social media. I saw Jeremy Zillar at WordCamp and he had some amazing stuff going on.
Henri, thank you for your outsiders perspective. What I was saying is that I might not have enjoyed all the speakers, but I loved the conference, and I think some of the criticisms were a little over the top.
Yes, Kathy, I’ve chatted with Chris about the speakers and such a lot during and since Gnomedex. I’ll also post a link to Chris’ post about Gnomedex in a minute or three.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:21 am
How come financial advisors never seem to be as wealthy as they
claim they’ll make you?
—————————————————————————————————-
http://ebloggy.com/jacquelynowensbm