The panel discussion is over. I wasn't sure what to expect going in to this but it was kind of fun. I was disappointed that Dan Turkette left during Nathan Gotsch's presentation and before the panel discussion started. Nathan criticized Dan's blogging style a couple of times and Dan walked out shortly there after. Dan has always struck me as somebody with pretty thick skin so I assumed he left due to some kind of emergency. However,
this post makes me think he simply left because he was mad. The event definitely would've been more lively and entertaining had Dan been a part of the discussion.
Still I thought we ended up with a few frank discussions on various topics and I'll try and get some video up if possible. I know the
Spaulding brothers took photos and video of the event so I'll see if they are willing to share that with FWL (or post it somewhere else). Also, a big thanks to
Rachel Blakeman for helping organize the event.
What did you think of the event?
Here's a few pictures from the event provided by Scott Spaulding. You can find more on
his Flickr site:
4 comments:
From what I saw it was an interesting event. If nothing else it was a good way to get bloggers together. I think that should happen more often.
I thought it went a little off subject a couple of times, and there were some areas of concern that were never mentioned. Overall though, I thought it was a very good presentation.
If I had to summarize what I got from it, it was a better understanding of how much the FW blogosphere has developed in a short time, and how much untapped potential for growth remains.
I thought Nathan made some very good points about the maturation of the level of discussion. I think there will always be an appropriate place for people to rant (God knows I like to). But the more civil and well documented the ideas put forth on the blogs, the more legitimacy it will bring to the blogoshere as a whole.
I thought Crawford posed an interesting question. If the blogs are having such a strong impact, why don't we see an increase in voter turnout? While changing the minds of people who already vote is certainly worthwhile, convincing more people to actually vote would be even more remarkable.
I think the personal attacks and general 'talking down to' to more than one person, are why several people left.
It could have been much better had someone who has any credibility in our community been unbiased and not politically transparent.
When are you gonna realize Dan is a thug? Given the names he uses like demotard etc. or the all popular Democrat pary, how could you expect anything different?
He is punk with a deserved inferiority complex.
Post a Comment