I've become disillusioned with much of the Python "Community" promises. I feel we’ve stopped conversing with empathy (I'm guilty of this as well and hope to do better).
I've taken my own lane of how I want to see community grow. Mario occupies that lane in his ability to communicate with patience, empathy, and understanding.
I hope we embrace him for a long time and I hope he moves into more and more positions of leadership in the community.
I think Hybrid, or Online first conferences, are not a great idea.
In contrast, your blog post talks about Fully Online Conferences (like PWC). I think those are amazing!
Trying to mix Online and In-Person conferences is a fool's errand. Online conferences are best when they lean into the advantages of Online. In-Person conferences are best when they lean into the advantages of In-Person.
I have many ideas of what things would improve both kinds of conferences! My favorite online conferences are those where, since anyway the talk will be watched on a screen, ask for a pre-submission of the recording.
The speaker can web-conference in for Q&A afterwards, but the talk itself being pre-recorded makes for one uniquely online experience: ask questions in the chat during the talk and the speaker can answer them during the talk.
Another advantage is improved a11y: subtitles can be prepared and reviewed ahead of time. If the conference has the capacity, it can even prepare subtitles in different languages ahead of time!
Imagine someone who's a native Spanish speaker with ESL. They can listen to the speaker, but check in the subtitles if there's a phrase they don't understand.
Another cool thing which online conferences can do, which would never work in-person, is the "24 hour conference". Have speakers and attendees in all time zones, schedule speakers in time-zone appropriate way!
As in all suggestions, there are trade-offs, and I want to acknowledge mine. Conferences being pure-in-person or pure-online means that, whatever you call "the biggest Python conference put on by the PSF", it will be in person. People who prefer online conferences can only attend the "second tier" conferences.
@moshez@pythonbynight to play my cards here, my goal here is to nail down what needs to change to remove the "second tier" feeling from some of these events.
In-person vs. online will always feel different, but the goal of treating conferences with an "Online first" approach is to make sure someone at home does not feel forgotten or secondary.
@moshez@pythonbynight from what I have seen, I find it jarring to watch from home and have a stream end and force me to switch to the next stream in the same room. It should feel more like a video that's on that I'm apart of instead of getting kicked out.
I think giving in-person and virtual attendees some incentives to interact in the same chat medium can help connect the two too. Maybe Q&A questions should only be taken and moderated from Slack or Discord?
@moshez@pythonbynight Maybe we should make a point to have more videos played at the event (we already play them) where the speaker can answer questions online or even post-giving the recorded talk do a breakout room online for follow-up questions/interactions.
My overall point is there is plenty of things we can do to connect both spaces.
I think we are all used to hoping on video calls to interact with people but maybe we should encourage more of that in both spaces?
@moshez@webology Maybe what I'm imagining is a world where hybrid does not mean sub-par experiences for one or the other.
Perhaps in my idealistic world of limitless resources, there are ways to be inclusive and "broaden" the audience of these conferences in ways that are novel or imaginative...
I don't think we want to "replace" in-person conferences, or somehow diminish their worth by having better online experiences.
The goal is increasing the audience by being generous and inclusive...
I guess this is our fundamental disagreement. Hybrid will always mean sub-par experience for one or the other.
My idealistic world of limitless resources has many online and many in-person conferences, and people choose to attend both or either, according to their preferences and circumstances.
I think this is just as inclusive and broad of a vision, while admittedly different than your inclusive and broad vision.
I don't think we should have online-first conferences. We should have online conferences and in-person conferences.
Online-first conference sounds like a shitty experience for in-person attendees. You have to go somewhere, potentially stay in a hotel, to...watch people on a TV screen?
I suggest making it online only and not encourage people to have a shitty in-person experience.
@moshez@webology Totally. I'm not trying to say my point of view is the "correct" one, or to insinuate that an alternate viewpoint (like the one you mention) is somehow less valid or inclusive.
I do think it's worth thinking about your first statement--that you can't have a hybrid event without lowering the standard of the online or in-person counterpart.
Is this proven? Are there things we haven't tried yet? Are they worth trying?
Feels like a mathematical certainty about the theory of optimization. You can optimize more when you drop constraints. Dropping the constraint "make online attendees feel like 1st class attendees" will make for a better experience for in-person attendees, all other things being constant.
@moshez@webology Maybe you're right with the "theory of optimization"--though I suspect it doesn't necessarily have to be that way.
A lot of value attendees have for in-person conferences is networking/access to individuals to ask questions/discuss ... this wouldn't have to be taken away.
Online videos could be part of another "track" even. But if online speakers could engage with attendees and vice versa--that would be a net positive.
Then why not have it as a separate online conference? Then people who want to attend both can...attend both. They don't have to choose between one experience or the other.
@moshez@webology I liken it to "open spaces" or "hallway track" during PyCon. Those are "optional" enhancements for attendees. Some people go by and ONLY do those things. Others spend their time exclusively at talks.
If a fantastic "online" experience is part of a conference, how does that deter from people who already choose what to focus on?
Because a hallway track or open spaces depend on people being there in person. If you schedule it the next weekend, people won't be there.
In contrast, having the online part separate from the in-person part might make both more valuable. Imagine if there's an online conference two weeks before the in-person one.
People who go to both can explicitly arrange to meet, or plan a joint open space.
Maybe what we can do is have "linked" conferences. For example, you can register for both together, and there's some shared identity.
Maybe you can even have a shared CFP, with presenters marking "I only want to present in-person", "I only want to present online", or "Either is good". If that's what you mean by combining the conferences, I have no objection.
That said, running one amazing conference, online or in-person, is hard work. I think it makes sense for a conference organizing committee to not want to double the load.
I'm not really a member of the Django community, so I can't comment on Django con. When ATO tried to have "virtual presenters", it seems like that fell flat for the in-person attendees.
Perhaps Django would be served well by having an annual online conference, separate from the annual in-person one?
@moshez@webology I'll let Jeff (or any of the Django community) speak to it... I'm also mainly on the outskirts of the Django community, as I actually use the library very sparingly.
But to this point, I feel the Django community itself is increasingly inclusive and generous. Which in turn makes me want to stay connected...
And the fact that I was not only given a chance to provide a pre-recorded video, but also engage with conference goers in real-time is testament to that.
Add comment