The above subject is an accurate sentiment of how I felt moments after entering the doors of the Littauer Building on the campus of Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government last weekend. I’d marked the date on my calendar for the New England government unconference over six weeks earlier, and I was prepared to lead a session.
Under the section of the wiki for “proposed session titles,” I wrote I would lead a session, entitled, “What Do You Do After You Vote?” as described here:
After you vote for your local government officials, what do you next? Do you volunteer to serve on an appointed board or commission? Do you care about budget transfers or street sweepings and attend meetings that create laws and policies on such? It’s great that you might want government to do things online, but do you email your mayor to share your thoughts? Facilitated by a first-term city councilor in Newburyport, Mass., this is an open dialogue to learn how you are engaging with your local government leaders — or why you’re not. This will occur during the final session of the day.
I tweeted co-organizer Sarah Bourne on February 16 that I’d edited the wiki to lead the session during the final portion of the day, as I was busy that morning for a public dialogue the mayor had organized. Sarah replied that there were no guarantees; I didn’t know what that meant as I’d attended many barcamp-like events, and sessions are both planned in advance and scheduled on the fly. I assumed this would be no different.
So when March 6 arrived and the mayor’s forum ended and I drove an hour into Cambridge expecting to see my name and my session on some list with a marker of which room to walk toward, I was disappointed when I didn’t see my name.
I tweeted my frustration:
It seems that sessions were decided that morning — and because I wasn’t there, my session wasn’t posted.
Perusing other blog posts written subsequent to the day at Harvard, I can’t help but grin at the words of Brian Keaney:
I think the idea of an unconference is a good one, but what we had yesterday more closely resembled anarchy than pure democracy. If I was running it I would have anyone who is interested in leading a topic propose it on the wiki, as some did, ahead of time. Attendees could then vote on which they were interested in after reading the titles and descriptions.
The organizers could then intelligently combine those that are similar, and put together a schedule that makes sense…
I learned nothing during the approximate 2-3 hours of my time there. Moreover, I didn’t witness any A-Ha! moments by other participants. The only plus was meeting smart people after the event at a proximate bar and engaging each other in solid conversation. But the event itself was a disappointment.
Around the time I added my name to the wiki, I was warned by Justin Herman that the event may not be as fruitful as hoped. I guess he was right.
Related posts:
Learn more about Ari and AriWriter by visiting 
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Hi Ari, I’m sorry the conference wasn’t more rewarding for you. However, we were very explicit that the sessions would be finalized the day-of. We had limited spaces available, and also wanted to ensure the presenters were all there. We’ll be making some changes for next time, so hope you can participate then.
From Rob Goodspeed to you: ArborUpdate.com Shuts Down
If you are not going to accept wiki entries, then don’t ask for them. I have no problem with that logic.
Ari,
I sympathize with your frustration while understanding the organizer’s point of view. You did confirm you’d be present thus including your presentation made sense.
My one barcamp experience here in St. Louis didn’t hold fast to the wiki but we allowed that some folks would be late. We threw the schedule together by having everyone present toss up their presentation topics, throw in from the wiki, and told everyone it would still be flexible. A white board was the posting spot for the schedule. Very informal.
I’d expect any unconference to be the same. This sounds much like a misunderstanding than thoughtlessness.
Cheers to a better result next time.
Todd
From Todd Jordan to you: When a negative is a positive
The session planning process could have better, no question about that. Aside from that difficulty, not finding anything good to take away from the sessions during the day? I am disappointed that is what you found.
My experience on the other hand was exactly the opposite. I found plenty to take away, especially a listing of folks to continue the conversation with!
From Steve Sherlock to you: Five for Friday: #the5
It is popular for many people to say, “We don’t need government. Just get-the-hell out of our lives an’ everything would work better.”
My comment is always, “Oh really, then why don’t you move to Somalia…”
This is a great example of what happens when no one takes responsibility. It is shocking that it would come from the Harvard School of Business. What a waste of time for all the participants, and what a poor example for the students. Shame on them.
Video of #gov20ne is now online http://bit.ly/gov20ne
Feel free to share it w/ others!
Thanks
Justin
{ 1 trackback }