
Thursday's post from the BlogPhiladelphia unconference was an exercise in multi-tasking and it didn't work for me. The main thoughts made it to the screen, but there were simply too many ambient thoughts to do a good job. So, why attempt to live-blog in the first place? To put the possibility out there for those of you who can effectively use the same parts of your brain to do two things at once. It's obviously not one of my stronger talents, but I'll bet more than a few of you read that post and immediately saw how it could have been done so much better (by you, of course).
Not everything learned at a conference is on the schedule, and this was one of them: one person's mistake can be another person's jumping-off point. To those of you who came up with some good ideas about successful live-blogging, my hat is off and my less-than-satisfactory attempt is vindicated.
During the course of the next several weeks, as I digest and assimilate more of the information that was packed into the past two days, I'll be bringing as much of it here as will be useful or interesting to you.




.jpg)



I think live blogging comes in all forms and means different things to different people. Carolyn, I believe you did a fabulous job of capturing the feel of the unconference in your statement - "The main thoughts made it to the screen, but there were simply too many ambient thoughts to do a good job."
- for me, that statement summed up the conference. So much more was learned from the conversations around the tables.
Posted by: Lizzie | July 15, 2007 4:24 PM | Permalink to Comment