Thank you

[Kishore Balakrishnan]

Hi All,

 

I would like to thank you all for the work that you had done for the ColdFusion Summit. The Summit was a runaway success and one of the main reason was the content that was presented by you guys. As Tridib said with an average rating of 4.3 for all the sessions I know that people would spread the word about the summit and ColdFusion.

 

All credit again goes to the content committee (Tim, Jason, Dan and Rakshith), thanks guys you have been just great.

 

As Tridib announced in his concluding speech about CF Summit 2014, I would like to hear from you guys about anything that didn’t work well or any additions that you would like to be seen.

 

I hope to see you all in CF Summit 2014.

 

Thanks,

kishore

[Raymond Camden]

To me the biggest issue was the size of the rooms compared to the screens. It impacted some more than others - and it wasn't the end of the world, but there is no way you could read most screens if anywhere near the midway back mark. (Of course, my eyes are crap, so there's that.)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFSummit Speakers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cfsummit-speak...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cfsummit...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
===========================================================================
Raymond Camden, Adobe Developer Evangelist

Email : raymon...@gmail.com
Blog : www.raymondcamden.com
Twitter: cfjedimaster

[Jason Dean]

I suspect I speak for all of the speakers and attendees when I say thank you Kishore, Rakshith, and the rest of the Adobe team (Rupesh, Hemant, Elisha, Ray, Ben, Ram, and any others I forgot to mention or didn't have a chance to meet) for your parts on this conference and for sparing no expense on everything related to the conference.  For a first-time conference, I would say that *EVERYTHING* went off without a problem.  Well done! I felt like I was at MAX. And not just a Mini-MAX, it felt like MAX.  

A special thanks to Karen and the Crawford Group for their amazing work.  Such responsive, professional and all around fantastic people with whom to work.  

Kishore, I will point out that I believe you forgot to list Ray as part of the content committee.  

Anyway, if we don't do this again, I will be sorely disappointed.  *Sorely* disappointed.  

I hope to see you many of you at cf.Objective() 2014 and, if all goes well, at CFSummit 2014!!

Jason

On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Kishore Balakrishnan <kis...@adobe.com> wrote:

--

[Scott Stroz]

For a first year conference, this was damn near perfect. Sure there were issues, but I feel they were relatively minor.

Thanx to everyone involved in putting it together and congratulations on a job extremely well done.

Scott Stroz
http://www.boyzoid.com
--------------------------------------------------
No trees were killed in the sending of this message, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced

[Jason Dean]

I'm not sure it's possible to make the screens any larger, especially in the keynote room.

I think the best was to address this is by:

1. Letting speakers know to make their fonts larger, especially in code samples

2. Encourage speakers to make their slide deck available in advance for local viewing on laptops and tablets

3. Warn attendees of the issue and encourage them to sit closer

4. Ensure we are getting projectors of the highest quality from the AV company.  I feel the projectors that were used were sub-standard, at best. High-contrast, high-resolution, high-brightness projectors. 

I was actually able to see pretty well from the back, even with some of the smaller fonts on code samples. But I am also considerably younger and better looking than Ray.  ;)  

Jason

[Raymond Camden]

Well, if we can't change it for next year, I definitely think a warning will be fine - let's just not forget. ;)

[Simon Free]

The only issue I can think of, and is one that dogs all conferences, is more power strips.  I know they added some during the first day but I think we need to have more than the first few rows powered.  Everyone has their laptop with them so everyone will want power.  I know it can be used to entice people to sit at the front, but for packed rooms that might not be possible.

For a first time conference you guys did an amazing job.I don't always see long time conferences pulling off an event with so few issues.

I think you all deserve a free copy of ColdFusion Builder as a reward!

-Si

Simon Free
Adobe Community Professional
Learn ColdFusion for Free! http://www.learncfinaweek.com

Email:si...@simonfree.com
AIM: americanshakes
URL:http://www.simonfree.com

"A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station..."

[Vicky]

Personally, I heard none of the typical conference complaints. Session rooms weren't too hot / too cold. Wifi was good. Coffee was plentiful. Food was good. Swag / Builder licenses were appreciated. 

There was an excited vibe and inspired undercurrent with regard to session content and various presentation styles. It was good to see all the people networking and to hear that some attendees had *just* adopted CF into their departments. Lots of side meetings / collaborations seemed to be happening.

It was tangible and visible reinforcement to all attendees that Adobe cares and CF is not dead. The buzz it created on social media had a few people regretting the decision not to come, to say the least. I believe this is going to breathe additional life into ColdFusion.

The Adobe team, and Karen's team were awesome. They went over and above to accommodate.

The one suggestion I would make is to tie CFHour to the open bar / networking event next time vs put them up against BoFs. I heard more than a few people say that they'd prefer to be at CFHour but really needed to be at the UG workshop and vice versa. Both were of equal value as high profile, open floor forums. (And it would be nice to have 30 minutes to test the CBR broadcast configuration with the board ops before they leave, but I'm not sure we've ever been that lucky. The people in the CFHour audience seemed to be having a fantastic time, and I eventually got us on-air. The CFHour guys put on a hell of a show!) Anyway, this is secondary to the sessions and everything else.. and all of it was a smashing success!!

Count me in, if you need a Media Partner for 2014. :)

[Dave Ferguson]

Overall I was very impressed with the conference.  Everyone involved did an amazing job.  The content was top notch and all the presenters did an amazing job. 

A big thanks to Karen and her team.  They did an amazing job and really listened to feedback and made things happen on the fly.  Also, a big thanks to the content committee for their hard work.

Couple things that I think could have been different...

The rooms needed power for the attendees.  At least in the first few rows.

The screens were to small for the rooms.  The screens could have been larger as it was hard to see screens from the back of the rooms.

There could have been better signage as to where the registration was on Wednesday evening.  It took us a while to find it.

I am totally grateful for Adobe to allowing us to do a live CFHour show.  However, I was not a fan of when it was scheduled.  Having it directly after an event that had an open bar for 1.5 hours led to some issues with the audience.  We had at least one very drunk person in the front row that derailed the show on multiple occasions.  If I had security there I probably would have had him escorted out of the room.

I am very much looking forward to CFSummit 2014.  With the attendance and all the good things I have heard I think it would be a travesty to not do it again.

Thanks again,

====================
= Dave Ferguson
====================
= http://blog.dkferguson.com
= http://www.cfhour.com
= http://twitter.com/dfgrumpy
= Adobe Community Professional
====================

--

[Adam Tuttle]

I'll echo all of the previous sentiments: A resounding success all around. In particular, I was very impressed with the wifi. I heard that it was a last minute addition, but it was amazing. Well done, there.

If I'm searching for nits to pick, I'd say:

1. The soda selection was sub-par. Personally I was disappointed not to see Mountain Dew, but in general I think tech events tend to favor: Coke, Diet Coke, and Mountain Dew. It was also hard to find soda at times other than breakfast/lunch (between sessions). Not everyone drinks coffee! :)
   
   
2. Screen size to room size ratio, especially in the breakout rooms, was kind of terrible. As Jason said this was only made worse by the projectors. In addition to the low contrast ratio and brightness, I also felt like they were a little bit out of focus. Next time it would be better if the rooms weren't so long and narrow, or if we could switch to 1 larger screen instead of 2 smaller screens.

... but again, this is just looking for things to nit-pick. Overall I think everything went off without a hitch. Most importantly, you reacted well to fix problems that were within your control: some power strips showed up in breakout rooms, room temperature was adjusted, etc.

All in all, well done! Be proud of what you accomplished. It was great and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to anyone, attendee or speaker.

Adam

[Rakshith N]

Thanks again to each one of you for adding to the success if the conference. All of you have done an excellent job and it is evident in the avg session rating being a high of 4.3/5. Take a bow!

We will also share with you your individual session feedback this week. But that is only after we recover from the 22 hr flight back home :)

This could also be a great time for you think about the CF topic you want to speak about at the next CF Summit. We did not have dedicated topics on best practices this time, although you may have covered some aspects of it in your individual sessions. Those could be useful to have next time around.

Hope to see each one of you speak at the next CFSummit as well! 

Rakshith

[Karen Cassin]

Thank you!

 

All of this feedback is amazing and excellent.  Exactly what we need to make next year even better (and to get more budget out of Kishore to get bigger screens, more sodas, more power, etc) J

 

I enjoyed meeting each – and every one of you … and can’t wait for 2014.

 

Thanks for all of the compliments and constructive feedback.  It’s the only way to reach the best this event can possibly be.

 

Cin-cin!

 

Karen

 

From: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com [mailto:cfsummit...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Adam Tuttle
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 1:41 PM
To: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [cfsummit-speakers] Thank you

 

I'll echo all of the previous sentiments: A resounding success all around. In particular, I was very impressed with the wifi. I heard that it was a last minute addition, but it was amazing. Well done, there.

[Charlie Arehart]

Of course I echo all the kudos. It really was a great conference on so many levels.

 

As long as you’re open to feedback, Karen, here are a few more that I’ve not seen others mention here (or on twitter, but I could have missed them):

 

1) with regard to the name badges, the name and company name fonts were too small. There was LOTs of room on the badge to increase those by double. :-) This benefits not only us old guys (I honestly couldn’t read most even standing right in front of someone and looking directly at the badge), but even for young folks it’s helpful to be able to casually glance down and see the name (and company name). The bigger the letters, the easier that is. It especially helps attendees, as well as speakers, when people may come up who know you but you can’t quite place their name. :-)

 

2) as for the evals, I thought I heard that there was one for the whole event, but I couldn’t find it on the site or mobile app. Did I just miss it? I would have raised the above there. I wonder how many other people couldn’t find it.

 

3) were the evals anonymous? It was not at all clear in the mobile app. Some people will be a LOT more honest about their rating and feedback if the eval is anonymous. If folks think that their name is associated with their eval, especially if it may be shared with the speakers, they may have really been less likely to be frank. That can cause rankings to go up, but then you may not sincerely needed feedback from those afraid of this issue. I do realize that there was a place on the mobile app eval to put an email address. That didn’t help in clarifying whether it was anonymous or not.

 

4) some complained that the web site schedule signup and mobile app were not synced. They had filled out the web site before the event, but could not see their schedule in the app. I hadn’t used the web site scheduler beforehand and found the mobile app “my schedule” feature sufficient.

5) That said, it would have been very helpful to have a link to the survey for a session from its session “page” within the app, so people didn’t need to go to the survey page and select the day and session.

6) It also would have been nice to link to the presenter’s bio from each session “page”. It was not linked, so one would have to leave that screen and go to the presenters section to look them up manually. Perhaps that was a limit of the cfclient app, and I do realize that next year’s app could be far more powerful, but in case it was just an oversight, I’d like to get this on the list for consideration next year.

7) The “notifications” page on the mobile app was helpful, but please do consider enabling an option next year to have that cause notifications within the phone (popups), or perhaps an option to receive them as texts (if notifications are not supported on the phone in use for some reason). It’s just that I didn’t think to look at them regularly and I do see now that there were some interesting ones that I’d missed as I only looked at it the first morning (and didn’t see much to draw me back, and I just forgot about it to be honest). Having it either default to notify us, or having that as a clear option to pick on first use would make the notifications more effective for many, I think.

 

Again, those last 3 on the mobile app are just quibbles. The app was otherwise quite helpful.

And above all, please don’t remember any of this as me “complaining more than praising”. I would again echo all the praises shared so far. :-) Great job to all involved.

 

/charlie

[Adam Tuttle]

Oh, thanks Charlie, you reminded me of another nit:

The UX on the in-app feedback form needs improvement. The stars were very small, making it hard to select a precise star rating. Also, the submit button was far too close to the last set of stars, resulting in my submitting a rating for Brian Klaas of 5-stars in every category except for the last, which I unintentionally submitted with 0 stars. (Brian's session was the highlight of the conference for me, at the very least in delivery. That man can present!)

Further compounding the issue, there was no way to update a submitted eval - I tried changing that last rating to 5 stars and submitting again, but it was refused. I think allowing updates would be A Good Thing™.

Adam

--

[Tim Cunningham]

Good points from all.  We will be reviewing this board next year for points learned.

Sent from a mobile device, blame all typos on my phone.

[Simon Free]

Also someone suggested putting locations on name tags so you know if the person is local to you or not.

If possible it would be great to print the name tags on both sides so when it flips you still know who the person is.

[Dave Ferguson]

But I thought the blank back is how you activate incognito mode.

[Brian Klaas]

I know I'm a bit late to the conversation, but I too would like thank Kishore, Tridib, Rakshith and everyone at Adobe for providing the resources (funding, staff and otherwise) to produce such an excellent conference. It was pretty awesome to see so many people excited about the short- and long-term future of ColdFusion.

Tim, Jason, Dan and Rakshith did a great job picking the right topics and speakers. I did not hear a single complaint that the sessions were too basic or too advanced or not relevant to attendees work.

I'd also like to thank Karin and her team for their excellent work. Karin was simply awesome, and her positive, can-do attitude was on display through the whole process.

A couple observations for next year:

- I strongly suggest that there be a single, much larger display in each room next year. While I'm sure we all agree that the displays need to be larger, a single display will allow the screen to be even larger. If there are two screens per room, each screen has to be positioned in a way that is visually appealing (ie; equidistant), which means that each screen will need to be smaller than a single, large screen. Additionally, although we like to think that having a second screen isn't a distraction, it actually is. We evolved as a species to notice tiny movements on our peripheral vision, so every time someone has an action on two screens in a room, our eyes and brains are forced to process both sets of information. It may not seem like much of a distraction, but the research has shown that it impedes cognitive flow.

I realize that in the keynote room, you need to have multiple screens due to the size of the room. In the non-keynote rooms, you do not.

- Related to this, it would be great if the rooms could be smaller across the board and if none of the individual sessions would be held in the keynote room. It's extremely difficult for a speaker of any caliber to engage people in a room the size of the keynote room at this conference. I know that space is at a premium, and that conference organizers pay for all the space that they use, but the keynote room is not a good space for individual audience member engagement and discussion (which I think we all hope happens in our sessions). Very few of the conferences I've attended (technical and otherwise) hold breakout sessions in the keynote room for this reason.

I also do not think you need to have rooms which can accommodate 1/2 or more of all attendees in a single room. It's extremely unlikely that half or more of the attendees at any conference will decide to go to a single breakout session. Having smaller rooms would alleviate the problems introduced by the deep and narrow rooms at this conference, and give a greater sense of closeness with the speakers and fellow attendees.

- I'd like to +100 to Simon's suggestion of printing names on both sides of the badges. I feel half-compulsive about checking my badge to make sure that my name is on the side facing forward whenever I talk to new people. It should be easy to find out someone's name from their badge.

So thanks again to everyone involved, and I look forward to CF Summit 2014!

brian

[Rakshith N]

Thanks again to each one of you for adding to the success of the conference. All of you have done an excellent job and it is evident in the avg session rating being a high of 4.3/5. Take a bow!

 

We will also share with you your individual session feedback this week. But that is only after we recover from the 22 hr flight back home :)

 

This could also be a great time for you think about the CF topic you want to speak about at the next CF Summit.

Hope to see each one of you speak at the next CFSummit as well! 

 

Rakshith

 

From: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com [mailto:cfsummit...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Brian Klaas
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 6:11 AM
To: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [cfsummit-speakers] Thank you

 

I know I'm a bit late to the conversation, but I too would like thank Kishore, Tridib, Rakshith and everyone at Adobe for providing the resources (funding, staff and otherwise) to produce such an excellent conference. It was pretty awesome to see so many people excited about the short- and long-term future of ColdFusion.

[Charlie Arehart]

Just a couple thoughts in reply, Brian, about the room/screen layout (and a tip at the end for everyone, regarding keeping badges from flipping over):

- Brian, given that there were only 3 breakouts, it seems it WOULD be possible that one of the 3 could grab half-or more of the attendees. After all the glowing (and well-deserved) reviews for your session, this could well be the situation next year (and I hereby call “dibs” on NOT being put against him for that reason, should I be selected again to speak next year!). But seriously, I do think with only 3 tracks, it’s not unreasonable for them to use the keynote space for any session they think will be well-suited

-  And here’s another reason I think that would not be so bad: I realize you prefer that the room(s) NOT have 2 screens, but I had wondered if the problem of the deep-long breakout rooms might be solved by going to making them very wide instead. It seemed to me that there was little reason (until I read your preference) not to put 2 screens into the breakout rooms as well (or at least one as long as Islander BG was) and set it up to have people facing the side instead. And honestly, if the room is long and wide, and people place themselves in front of one screen or the other, I hope that that peripheral problem might be mitigated (though not avoided, for those sitting in the middle).  I realize it also goes against the “I want to engage people right in front of me” sentiment, if they are seated to the sides, but I have attended plenty of user groups and conferences over the years where they did have that setup, because it did in fact allow people to see the screens better. I suspect that even a very large screen in the Islander BG room would have been hard to see more than halfway back. Plus, it would have been reminiscent of the first Apple commercial for Mac, the 1984 theme with the girl running down the aisle hurling a ball and chain at the big screen while the drones sat  stone-faced staring at it. :-)

- finally, to all regarding name badges flipping over,  that could be cool to print on both sides. In the meantime, and for conferences that don’t, here’s a trick: use the clip that holds the badge and clip the badge to your shirt, facing forward. :-) This works better if wearing a buttoned shirt it works, of course, and not as well for t-shirts and polo-style shirts unless you’re willing to get a pinched fold. Even so, doing this trick was harder this year because the plastic clip used at CFSummit to hold the badge was not quite as strong as typical metal clasps on most badges—but that’s not a complaint. Most never think to use this trick to hold the badge in place facing forward, but I love sharing the tip when I can (and do often at conferences)! :-)

/charlie

From: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com [mailto:cfsummit...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Brian Klaas
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 9:11 AM
To: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [cfsummit-speakers] Thank you

 

I know I'm a bit late to the conversation, but I too would like thank Kishore, Tridib, Rakshith and everyone at Adobe for providing the resources (funding, staff and otherwise) to produce such an excellent conference. It was pretty awesome to see so many people excited about the short- and long-term future of ColdFusion.

[Charlie Arehart]

Hey Rakshith, as far as our proposing new prospective topics for the next summit, are you thinking it would be in about a year from now?

If so, that seems just a little early to be considering topics, at least for some subjects. :-) Even if related to CF11, it could be that we may not think of some until CF11 has been released and in use for some time, or we may change what we may propose.

So just kind of curious to hear more about this expression of interest. Care to share any more to help us?

/charlie

 

From: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com [mailto:cfsummit...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rakshith N
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:43 PM
To: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [cfsummit-speakers] Thank you

 

Thanks again to each one of you for adding to the success if the conference. All of you have done an excellent job and it is evident in the avg session rating being a high of 4.3/5. Take a bow!

 

We will also share with you your individual session feedback this week. But that is only after we recover from the 22 hr flight back home :)

 

This could also be a great time for you think about the CF topic you want to speak about at the next CF Summit. We did not have dedicated topics on best practices this time, although you may have covered some aspects of it in your individual sessions. Those could be useful to have next time around.

 

Hope to see each one of you speak at the next CFSummit as well! 

 

 

Rakshith

-------- Original message --------
From: Adam Tuttle <ad...@fusiongrokker.com>
Date: 28/10/2013 02:11 (GMT+05:30)

To: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [cfsummit-speakers] Thank you

I'll echo all of the previous sentiments: A resounding success all around. In particular, I was very impressed with the wifi. I heard that it was a last minute addition, but it was amazing. Well done, there.

 

If I'm searching for nits to pick, I'd say:

1. The soda selection was sub-par. Personally I was disappointed not to see Mountain Dew, but in general I think tech events tend to favor: Coke, Diet Coke, and Mountain Dew. It was also hard to find soda at times other than breakfast/lunch (between sessions). Not everyone drinks coffee! :)
2. Screen size to room size ratio, especially in the breakout rooms, was kind of terrible. As Jason said this was only made worse by the projectors. In addition to the low contrast ratio and brightness, I also felt like they were a little bit out of focus. Next time it would be better if the rooms weren't so long and narrow, or if we could switch to 1 larger screen instead of 2 smaller screens.

 

... but again, this is just looking for things to nit-pick. Overall I think everything went off without a hitch. Most importantly, you reacted well to fix problems that were within your control: some power strips showed up in breakout rooms, room temperature was adjusted, etc.

 

All in all, well done! Be proud of what you accomplished. It was great and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to anyone, attendee or speaker.

 

Adam

 

On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Dave Ferguson <da...@dkferguson.com> wrote:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFSummit Speakers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to

cfsummit-speak...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to

cfsummit...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFSummit Speakers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cfsummit-speak...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cfsummit...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFSummit Speakers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cfsummit-speak...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cfsummit...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[br...@bradwood.com]

Charlie, you may have seen this already, but I just got these instructions on how to fill out the conference eva in my E-mail:

 

You can access the conference survey on the conference website (http://cfsummit.adobeevents.com/) after logging into your account, and selecting "Event Surveys". You will see the Conference Survey toward the bottom of that list.

 

Thanks!

~Brad

ColdBox Platform Evangelist
Ortus Solutions, Corp

E-mail: br...@coldbox.org
ColdBox Platform: http://www.coldbox.org
Blog: http://www.codersrevolution.com 

[Steve Drucker]

I think that next year we should organize a texas holdem poker tournament for the instructors and attendees.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFSummit Speakers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cfsummit-speak...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cfsummit...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
Regards,
Steve Drucker
Founder / President
Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
Acquia, Adobe, Brightcove, Google, JackBe, Paperthin, Sencha Consulting/Training/Sales/Support

"We've got you covered"

Fig Leaf Software is a Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) on GSA Schedule

[Raymond Camden]

Bah - Epic Spellwars. None of this wimpy poker crap. ;)

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Steve Drucker <sdru...@figleaf.com> wrote:

I think that next year we should organize a texas holdem poker tournament for the instructors and attendees.

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:40 PM, <br...@bradwood.com> wrote:

Charlie, you may have seen this already, but I just got these instructions on how to fill out the conference eva in my E-mail:

 

Founder / President
Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
Acquia, Adobe, Brightcove, Google, JackBe, Paperthin, Sencha Consulting/Training/Sales/Support

"We've got you covered"

Fig Leaf Software is a Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) on GSA Schedule

[Jason Dean]

Face-Melting Magic!!!

jason

--

[Charlie Arehart]

Yep, it did arrive later today. Thanks.

I guess I would propose that somehow it be communicated better at the conference or in the app that the “whole conference survey” would be coming by email later. Many of us might have saved our feedback then for that. :-) But it’s been helpful to discuss some of this among the group.

Great to see you all (including the couple I somehow missed). Hope to be a part of the illustrious group next time.

/charlie

 

From: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com [mailto:cfsummit...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of br...@bradwood.com
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 1:41 PM
To: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [cfsummit-speakers] Thank you

 

Charlie, you may have seen this already, but I just got these instructions on how to fill out the conference eva in my E-mail:

[Brian Klaas]

One more thing for next year:

I'd strongly encourage the team not to expand the number of simultaneous sessions. I heard a number of attendees say that they were already having a hard time choosing between the offered sessions. Expanding to a fourth or fifth track would only exacerbate the problem for them, and, I believe, dilute the sense of community fostered by only having a limited number of tracks. By seeing the same people in sessions and then at lunch and then again in afternoon sessions, you're much more likely to forge connections with new people.

brian

--

[Vicky]

Given that all sessions relate to a specific technology and how it interacts with others, ColdFusion Summit might be ideal for a single track conference. I've seen this work surprisingly well at Clojure Conj.  Even though there area many different areas of CF expertise, this puts everyone in the same room the whole time and offers a better chance to expand knowledge and get other POVs.  No one has to choose, and it allows for more exposure to the community rock stars / experts.

 

I don't know what the max number of attendees would be before this sort of thing isn't plausible.  Imagine if you put a few more screens and speakers (of the audio variety) in at the keynote. Would that then be conducive to this?  Then use BoFs, or have an hour or two where all speakers are available to approach in a "meet the experts" sort of fashion for everyone to get one-on-one face time.  This may even allow attendees to get more questions answered specific to their needs.  Also more time to network between sessions / less time looking up room numbers and wandering around.

 

Just a thought.  It would be interesting to hear what you all say as speakers (of the session variety) on that.

[Simon Free]

I loved the 3 track approach.  As a speaker I like that I have more people in my sessions and as an attendee I like that there is less chance of conflict of interest.  It definitely had a good feel to it and not too overwhelming.

[Jason Dean]

One track?  Absolutely not.  

I would throw a fit, resign from the content committee, and throw a TV out the window. 

One-track conferences are a complete waste of time. I would not attend. I certainly wouldn't pay $1500+ for it.  

As for more tracks, sure, why not?  I mean, seriously, are we such a pampered bunch of prima donnas that people are complaining about having too many choices? Is there anything we won't complain about?

As a reference, here are some examples of ridiculous complaints:

- There was so much great content, I had a hard time deciding

- That chocolate cake was too rich

- The Battery Life on my iPhone is only 10 hours when I play Angry Birds for that entire time

- There is too much to do in Vegas, I can't fit it all in

- My spouse is so good-looking that others can't stop looking at him/her

- I took my kids to the park and I couldn't find a WiFi hotspot, now I'm bored

First World Problems. 

Maybe Las Vegas should tear down all but one hotel.  That was it would be easier to digest and no one would have to choose between activities. Think how cozy it would be. :)

</rant>

Jason

[Vicky]

Just so I can be sure, are you saying you don't like the idea? :P

 

I think "complaint" was just a choice of words vs. the intent that speakers may get more people (who actually want to be there, in the case of 3 vs. 5 tracks) and attendees may get more info / value. I would second the vote not to expand the number of tracks, in any case.  Realizing that a single track is a whole different animal, there does come a point where it loses value if you can only get to a small percent of the sessions you want to see. 

 

BTW, I was asking from the curious POV of a general event organizer / observer leveraging the opportunity to ask a group like this. I do not steer nor speak and appreciate being on the list and in attendance, regardless of how the cake tastes. :)

[br...@bradwood.com]

Speaking of throwing TV's out the window, my main suggestion is to record the sessions.  I think that alone would alleviate the multi-track issue quite a bit.  I had someone E-mail me this morning and they found my slide deck in the Drop Box account, but since I took out a lot of extra text due to screen size and spent half of the time in the live demo, the slides weren't very useful to him and he wanted to know if I had a recording.  Of course, I pointed him to the applicable learn cf in a week course, and offered to present to his local user group, but it would have been nice if there was an official recording of my session.

Thanks!

~Brad

ColdBox Platform Evangelist
Ortus Solutions, Corp

E-mail: br...@coldbox.org
ColdBox Platform: http://www.coldbox.org
Blog: http://www.codersrevolution.com 

 

 

--------- Original Message ---------

Subject: Re: [cfsummit-speakers] Thank you

[Simon Free]

I actually liked not having to deal with setting up screen share and remembering to record.  For my situation it would have sucked as part of it was on the Elmo.

[Dan Wilson]

Any speaker who wants a recording of their preso should consider contacting Charlie Arehart. The online ColdFusion meetup is a great place to record and present your topics.

[Raymond Camden]

Huge +1

[br...@bradwood.com]

I'll remind us that the conference is for the attendee's convenience, not ours :)  The conference center has paid staff helping with audio-visual-- can't they help with that?

[Jason Dean]

As an attendee, I have always liked the idea of recording the sessions. As an organizer, I would fear a negative ROI.  

First, video recording is expensive. Granted, Adobe probably has in-house people that could do it, but when you factor in travel, hotel, equipment, lighting, human resources, post production and distribution, it is still going to be very expensive. I seem to recall that when we looked into it for cf.Objective() the quote was in the neighborhood of $15,000 - $20,000.  

And what is the benefit to the conference?  Are people more likely to go if they know they will be able to see all of the sessions afterward? As an attendee, are you willing to spend $50-$60 more per ticket to offset the cost so that others can see the sessions for free?  As a speaker, do you want Adobe distributing *your* content for free with no residual payments? Is your session more likely to be selected by another conference if it is already available online to their attendees?

I know that, as an attendee that has many, many conferences to choose from throughout the year will be less likely to go to one that makes their content available for free afterward as video recordings. Why pay $1500 to go see content I can get for free and skip content that I can't see elsewhere because I spent my money on the first conference? And even if I did still decide to go to the conference, would I be less likely to go to the sessions if I knew I could see them online a short time later?  I think I might go enjoy Las Vegas instead. Hence, fewer people in sessions. 

I could be wrong about all of this. Maybe it would sell more tickets. Maybe the ROI would be fantastic.  But I doubt it. 

Jason

[Dan Wilson]

Recording video through hotels and a
AV companies is very expensive. At what cost would this be and how much would attendees want to pay for this service?

The attendees had a choice of presentations to watch. That was their convenience.

[br...@bradwood.com]

Oh, my goodness, I didn't mean with video cameras and such.  Just record the output of the projector and the audio of the microphone.  I mean, this is Adobe for crying out loud.  They have this product call Connect that they own.  :)  I'm sure they could create 3 Connect rooms for us and host the recordings for no charge.  (Or just export them to Vimeo like Luis does with our ColdBox Connection recordings)  They already do this for the user groups for free.  I for one, volunteer to remember to take on the arduous duty of hitting the record button at the beginning of my session for the benifit of the attendees.  I would also fully expect my content to be owned by Adobe anyway since it's their conference and they have already sold it to whomever they want.

 

Dan, sorry but giving attendees three quality sessions and then forcing them to miss 2 of them is not a convenience in any way shape or form.  

Thanks!

~Brad

ColdBox Platform Evangelist
Ortus Solutions, Corp

E-mail: br...@coldbox.org
ColdBox Platform: http://www.coldbox.org
Blog: http://www.codersrevolution.com 

 

 

--------- Original Message ---------

Subject: Re: Re: [cfsummit-speakers] Thank you
From: "Jason Dean" <dean...@gmail.com>

[Raymond Camden]

I love Connect, but as a speaker, I'll only do the 'sign in and record thing' if I absolutely have enough time before the presentation. A lot of times it isn't always possible beforehand.

[Jason Dean]

>>I'll remind us that the conference is for the attendee's convenience, not ours :) 

It is for your convenience as well. When we speak, we work for CHEAP! We are doing the conference a favor and should not be inconvenienced unnecessarily.  

When I factor in the time I put into a session, researching the topic, putting together the slides, testing code, preparing demoes, formatting themes, rehearsing (yeah, right), and delivering the presentation, in addition to my own expenses in getting to the confernece, taxis, food etc; and then compare that time to what I get "paid" for speaking (free admission to the conference, hotel), I don't come anywhere near my usual hourly rate for consulting on the same topics. No where close!  Even if deliver the same presentation at two, or even three, other conferences it still doesn't come close to what I get paid to work. 

When you speak at a conference, it is not the conference doing you a favor, nor is it the attendees paying you for your time. As a speaker, YOU are the one doing all the work and getting paid little for it.  You are the royalty in the room.  As a conference organizer, I recognize that the speakers are the rockstars and deserve to be treated as such where possible and within reason. 

Jason

[Dan Wilson]

I know buddy, it's all so simple right?

There is a connect room set up for this purpose, it's called the Online ColdFusion Meetup. You are also free to start you own Connect session before you give your own talk.

DW

br...@bradwood.com

Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:26 PM

Oh, my goodness, I didn't mean with video cameras and such.  Just record the output of the projector and the audio of the microphone.  I mean, this is Adobe for crying out loud.  They have this product call Connect that they own.  :)  I'm sure they could create 3 Connect rooms for us and host the recordings for no charge.  (Or just export them to Vimeo like Luis does with our ColdBox Connection recordings)  They already do this for the user groups for free.  I for one, volunteer to remember to take on the arduous duty of hitting the record button at the beginning of my session for the benifit of the attendees.  I would also fully expect my content to be owned by Adobe anyway since it's their conference and they have already sold it to whomever they want.

 

Dan, sorry but giving attendees three quality sessions and then forcing them to miss 2 of them is not a convenience in any way shape or form.  

Thanks!

~Brad

ColdBox Platform Evangelist
Ortus Solutions, Corp

E-mail: br...@coldbox.org
ColdBox Platform: http://www.coldbox.org
Blog: http://www.codersrevolution.com 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFSummit Speakers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cfsummit-speak...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cfsummit...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Jason Dean

Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:12 PM

As an attendee, I have always liked the idea of recording the sessions. As an organizer, I would fear a negative ROI.  

First, video recording is expensive. Granted, Adobe probably has in-house people that could do it, but when you factor in travel, hotel, equipment, lighting, human resources, post production and distribution, it is still going to be very expensive. I seem to recall that when we looked into it for cf.Objective() the quote was in the neighborhood of $15,000 - $20,000.  

And what is the benefit to the conference?  Are people more likely to go if they know they will be able to see all of the sessions afterward? As an attendee, are you willing to spend $50-$60 more per ticket to offset the cost so that others can see the sessions for free?  As a speaker, do you want Adobe distributing *your* content for free with no residual payments? Is your session more likely to be selected by another conference if it is already available online to their attendees?

I know that, as an attendee that has many, many conferences to choose from throughout the year will be less likely to go to one that makes their content available for free afterward as video recordings. Why pay $1500 to go see content I can get for free and skip content that I can't see elsewhere because I spent my money on the first conference? And even if I did still decide to go to the conference, would I be less likely to go to the sessions if I knew I could see them online a short time later?  I think I might go enjoy Las Vegas instead. Hence, fewer people in sessions. 

I could be wrong about all of this. Maybe it would sell more tickets. Maybe the ROI would be fantastic.  But I doubt it. 

Jason

[Scott Stroz]

Aww...you think I am a rockstar. You are so sweet.

Scott Stroz
http://www.boyzoid.com
--------------------------------------------------
No trees were killed in the sending of this message, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced

[Jason Dean]

>> Oh, my goodness, I didn't mean with video cameras and such.  Just record the output of the projector and the audio of the microphone.  I mean, this is Adobe for crying out loud. >> >> They have this product call Connect that they own.  :)  

Yeah, because Adobe is a bit of a player in the online media thing and have other products like Premiere and After Effects they would be perfectly fine with hosting and releasing a half-assed effort like what you describe.  

I know if I was Adobe I'd be embarrassed by it. It's not something to can "just" do.  It's all or nothing. Go check out the MAX videos and see the quality that goes into that effort. MAX has a much bigger budget, but if it was my conference I would rather not release anything at all than to release anything short of the same quality. 

Jason

On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 1:26 PM, <br...@bradwood.com> wrote:

[br...@bradwood.com]

Hmm, I'm not sure why there's so much push back to this.  I'll be honest, I've done this so many times when recording ColdBox and ContentBox webinars and it is very easy and quick.  A few seconds of the presenter's time that isn't even comparable to all the hours we put into preparing our presos.

 

In addition to using Connect to record our last two ColdBox Developer's Weeks, I've also seen this done successfully by Dee Sadler's D2W Conference she's put on in Kansas City for the past several years.  Each presenter table has an omni-directional mic, and she distributes the Connect URL to the speakers ahead of time.

 

I won't bang on about this anymore since it really isn't that big of an issue, but it seems like we're exaggerating the effort and minimizing the benifit.  

Thanks!

~Brad

ColdBox Platform Evangelist
Ortus Solutions, Corp

E-mail: br...@coldbox.org
ColdBox Platform: http://www.coldbox.org
Blog: http://www.codersrevolution.com 

 

 

--------- Original Message ---------

Subject: Re: [cfsummit-speakers] Thank you

[Scott Stroz]

I have spoken at 2 conferences that asked us to record via Connect. Each was a nightmare. Connect crashed halfway through one of them and seemed to always get in the way when I was switching back & forth between preso and editor or other examples.

Scott Stroz
http://www.boyzoid.com
--------------------------------------------------
No trees were killed in the sending of this message, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced

[Jason Dean]

And you're simplify the issues that go along with it. You're ignoring half of the arguments made and harping on just one point. You cannot reduce the argument to one point that suits your purpose and then say that we're over complicating things.  

Jason

[Dan Wilson]

Re: Dan, sorry but giving attendees three quality sessions and then forcing them to miss 2 of them is not a convenience in any way shape or form.  

We are giving the convenience of organizing 3 really high quality sessions for them to choose from. I see that as convenience. For all the reasons mentioned before, recording the sessions isn't really something that can be done without a high monetary expense, or a high speaker inconvenience.

We are able to record all of the NCDevCon presentations because we have free use of a system that costs well into the 6 figures. Even then, the recordings aren't perfect. We'd need to edit them to bring up to the level of a professional conference. Good thing we don't want to be a professional conference.

DW

br...@bradwood.com

Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:26 PM

Oh, my goodness, I didn't mean with video cameras and such.  Just record the output of the projector and the audio of the microphone.  I mean, this is Adobe for crying out loud.  They have this product call Connect that they own.  :)  I'm sure they could create 3 Connect rooms for us and host the recordings for no charge.  (Or just export them to Vimeo like Luis does with our ColdBox Connection recordings)  They already do this for the user groups for free.  I for one, volunteer to remember to take on the arduous duty of hitting the record button at the beginning of my session for the benifit of the attendees.  I would also fully expect my content to be owned by Adobe anyway since it's their conference and they have already sold it to whomever they want.

 

Dan, sorry but giving attendees three quality sessions and then forcing them to miss 2 of them is not a convenience in any way shape or form.  

Thanks!

~Brad

ColdBox Platform Evangelist
Ortus Solutions, Corp

E-mail: br...@coldbox.org
ColdBox Platform: http://www.coldbox.org
Blog: http://www.codersrevolution.com 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFSummit Speakers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cfsummit-speak...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cfsummit...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Jason Dean

Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:12 PM

As an attendee, I have always liked the idea of recording the sessions. As an organizer, I would fear a negative ROI.  

First, video recording is expensive. Granted, Adobe probably has in-house people that could do it, but when you factor in travel, hotel, equipment, lighting, human resources, post production and distribution, it is still going to be very expensive. I seem to recall that when we looked into it for cf.Objective() the quote was in the neighborhood of $15,000 - $20,000.  

And what is the benefit to the conference?  Are people more likely to go if they know they will be able to see all of the sessions afterward? As an attendee, are you willing to spend $50-$60 more per ticket to offset the cost so that others can see the sessions for free?  As a speaker, do you want Adobe distributing *your* content for free with no residual payments? Is your session more likely to be selected by another conference if it is already available online to their attendees?

I know that, as an attendee that has many, many conferences to choose from throughout the year will be less likely to go to one that makes their content available for free afterward as video recordings. Why pay $1500 to go see content I can get for free and skip content that I can't see elsewhere because I spent my money on the first conference? And even if I did still decide to go to the conference, would I be less likely to go to the sessions if I knew I could see them online a short time later?  I think I might go enjoy Las Vegas instead. Hence, fewer people in sessions. 

I could be wrong about all of this. Maybe it would sell more tickets. Maybe the ROI would be fantastic.  But I doubt it. 

Jason

[Adam Tuttle]

I think we've gotten to the point where we can agree that we're not going to agree on recordings. The suggestion has been made, and arguments for and against have been heard. Let's move on, eh?

I'd like to go back to the number of tracks discussion. I personally think 2-3 tracks is the sweet spot. 

With 1 track I often feel like a third to half of the sessions just aren't applicable to me for one reason or another (too enterprise, too niche, too beginner, etc). But that's not to say that I completely agree with Jason's line of reasoning. If we were to take his argument at face value, 200 tracks would be "worth more" to attendees than 2 tracks. Only mathematically -- They'd have more to choose from, but certainly they should be able to find something interesting and worthwhile in every time slot long before we get to 200 tracks, right?

As a general rule of thumb, I'd say you probably can't fit more than 200 people in a room and actively engage them (maybe less), so if you've got a 500 person conference, you need 3+ tracks so that you don't end up with a room with 300 people in it. If we double the attendee limit for the summit next year, then maybe 5 tracks would be the sweet spot.

That said, I'd rather see the number of days increased to 3 and the attendees capped at 750 than see 1000 attendees for 2 days.

Adam

[Dan Wilson]

I'm not so sure I agree with all of what you said. Assuming proper AV/Screen sizes, one should be able to hold the attention of a lot more than 200 people at once.

I liked the 3-choices-per-time-slot. I think it made sense for the attendees to find something they would like or learn from, without missing a bunch of content.

I also liked the 500 person size of the conference. It was easy to run into the same people over and over again. Doubling the size of the conference would alter the experience of the attendees moreso than doubling the number of people in the room.

DW

---

Adam Tuttle

Tuesday, October 29, 2013 4:40 PM

I think we've gotten to the point where we can agree that we're not going to agree on recordings. The suggestion has been made, and arguments for and against have been heard. Let's move on, eh?

I'd like to go back to the number of tracks discussion. I personally think 2-3 tracks is the sweet spot. 

With 1 track I often feel like a third to half of the sessions just aren't applicable to me for one reason or another (too enterprise, too niche, too beginner, etc). But that's not to say that I completely agree with Jason's line of reasoning. If we were to take his argument at face value, 200 tracks would be "worth more" to attendees than 2 tracks. Only mathematically -- They'd have more to choose from, but certainly they should be able to find something interesting and worthwhile in every time slot long before we get to 200 tracks, right?

As a general rule of thumb, I'd say you probably can't fit more than 200 people in a room and actively engage them (maybe less), so if you've got a 500 person conference, you need 3+ tracks so that you don't end up with a room with 300 people in it. If we double the attendee limit for the summit next year, then maybe 5 tracks would be the sweet spot.

That said, I'd rather see the number of days increased to 3 and the attendees capped at 750 than see 1000 attendees for 2 days.

Adam

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFSummit Speakers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cfsummit-speak...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cfsummit...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Dan Wilson

Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:30 PM

[Adam Tuttle]

Something else I heard with regards to the screens was that the 2nd one should be half-way back the room, so that attendees in the back could see it better (maybe on a side wall?)...

Adam

[Jason Dean]

>>Jason's line of reasoning. If we were
>>to take his argument at face value, 200
>>tracks would be "worth more" to
>>attendees than 2 tracks.

As I recall, Jason's line of reasoning was "why not?". I'm not sure how you extrapolated that awesome math out of that.

I've heard that more is better though, so let's go with 200 tracks. </sarcasm>.

Obviously I don't think 200 tracks would be better than two. But that straw man argument does not mean that four tracks would not be better than three.

>>so if you've got a 500 person conference, you need 3+ tracks so that you don't end up with a room with 300
>>people in it. If we double the attendee limit for the summit next year, then maybe 5 tracks would be the sweet spot.

I will remember that as we are cutting half of the content from cf.Objective() this year.  (I guess I wasn't done with </sarcasm>)

Jason

[Adam Tuttle]

Yeah Jason, I don't know what I was thinking. You're right. I rescind.

Adam

[Jason Dean]

Now I will admit that 4 or 5 tracks of *just* ColdFusion talks would be too much.  

Fortunately, I have heard that Adobe has some interests and projects in other web-related technologies that would probably pertain to the work CF developers do. If we did decide to go with more tracks, we'd also need to add some variety. 

Spitballing:

- PhoneGap (with and without CFClient)

- JavaScript (Did we really have No JS topics this year?)

- CF as a backend to JS Frameworks (Angular, Backbone, Ember, etc)

- Brackets

- Adobe AIR (a Game development session or two would be fun)

- Edge Tools (Reflow, Inspect, PhoneGap Build, Animate) 

- UI/UX Topics for Developers (not designers)

Variety, in my opinion, is the key to more tracks. 

Extra days would be an option too, but adding extra days pushes the cost to the attendee more directly, but the trade off there is they get more sessions for the extra cost.  

Jason

[Charlie Arehart]

Interesting idea, Jason. For any that may not have caught it, Jason was focusing on possibly showing a track or more of Adobe-specific tools that are related to CF (not adding web dev topics of just any kind).

I could see a couple of responses to this, one negative, one more speculative:

1) Wow, can no CF conference remain sacredly CF-focused?
2) Hmm, maybe this could lead ultimately to an Adobe DevCon (as opposed to Max which is clearly designer-focused).

Number 2 not so “out there”, just like the Adobe education materials for CF in colleges tries to be focused more on broader development with CF as the backend, but I realize that was not being proposed here.  And of course any good developer worth his salt should know about other languages and tools. And it’s worth noting that both Allaire and Macromedia called their conferences “Devcons”, so there’s precedence.

On the other hand, those arguing point 1 might feel that CF could indeed have enough going on about it to have the summit remain focused solely on it.

But Jason’s twist is subtle and worth considering (short of the conference becoming a full Adobe Devcon).

I’d not myself be against maybe having one track (out of 3 or 4) that could be focused on such other Adobe tools, and especially in how they can work with CF, or perhaps even work better than something in CF (as long as that is indeed the point of the session). I sense that this was another facet of Jason’s listed topics, rather than just having other topics simply because they’re in the same web dev space.

After all, there are enough conferences, both formerly CF-focused and otherwise, that have that broader web dev focus. And for that reason, I’d argue against having 2 or more tracks on general interest web dev topics, where basically half or more of the conference is as much about those things as about CF itself. And especially if the topics were not focused on how they work with or contrast to CF.

This is the “Adobe CF Summit” after all. People came expecting to hear about CF primarily, and they had no trouble drawing quite a crowd. And I think most would agree that the first year of a successful conference is often followed by a larger turnout the next year as people hear all the good things and realize what they missed. We may easily have double the attendance of last year, especially as there is new info about 11 to share/show by next year.  Perhaps if there was some grand backlash from the attendees that “it was too CF-specific”, then an argument could be made to broaden the focus generally, but there was none, that I heard.

But to be clear, I’m not arguing against Jason’s idea of a new track on Adobe dev tools that could be used with CF. That is an enhancement with some nice subtlety. I’m just thinking out loud about how some may respond.

And we certainly don’t want to put the summit in direct competition with those other conferences (like cfobjective and ncdevcon) which have done such broadening from “just CF”, because (I assume) they DID feel that CF alone was not enough.  I do like that there is a conference that really is boldly, confidently, and unabashedly CF-specific. :-) 

If it might morph ultimately into an Adobe DevCon (maybe in a couple of years, if not next year), I suppose that wouldn’t be horrible, but I do fear that some would use it as an excuse to say, “see, even Adobe couldn’t keep a CF-focused conference going”). I really don’t think that’s the case.  And again I could see arguing that it remain just as CF-focused as this year. But if we’re careful about positioning a new track, keeping it CF-related and especially if Adobe-tool-specific, I don’t think it would be a bad thing to the “cf summit branding”. Let’s just be careful about prematurely optimizing. :-)

 

/charlie

 

From: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com [mailto:cfsummit...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jason Dean
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 11:08 AM
To: cfsummit...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [cfsummit-speakers] Thank you

 

Now I will admit that 4 or 5 tracks of *just* ColdFusion talks would be too much.