8 ms·

Conference Speakers, Check Your Egos

nitwit005 7y ago
> if you ARE the only person capable of giving the talk then is there is a diversity issue. Can you take an honest look at the diversity of your industry and perhaps mentor new ones – especially those from under represented groups – to be able to speak on such topics? This seems a bit bizarre to me. Sure, they're the only one who knows right now, but they are giving a talk at a conference, which is supposed to have the purpose of educating a large number of people.
- monksy 7y ago
  I got the feeling the author was saying: "Step out of the way for what ever group we feel is marginalized today" It's such a regressive statement. If you know what you're talking about and are excited about it. YOU ARE THE RIGHT PERSON. The people who are at the conference and speaking are people who stepped up to do it. You don't just get this granted pass to be up there.
- gav 7y ago
  Some of the best talks I've seen are along the lines of "nobody cares about X but me, and here's why _you_ should care about it" or "I'm the only person who has attempted Y (and lived/succeeded) and here's what happened". If a lot of people could give the talk, it wouldn't be that interesting. Giving talks is often the first step at getting the message out.
- drak0n1c 7y ago
  My spouse plans conferences. Her event planning team is mostly women. Most of the speakers at their conferences are men - the main reason why is because many women candidates refuse the opportunity. An attendee who loudly complained about diversity became more understanding after being invited to help recruit speakers. The ego shouldn't be checked - it should be encouraged if you want more people to want to be conference speakers.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
mikelyons 7y ago
Your ego isn't something you just "check" People toss around the word ego with zero understanding of what ego is and how it functions. YOUR VERY SURVIVAL IS AT STAKE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8NNtpzYQx8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8NNtpzYQx8 But how developed does your consciousness have to be to even begin to grasp it?
Endy 7y ago
I hate the phrase, "check your [facet of personality]." I have asked people to examine their motivations, and I always will - because saying, "why do you believe you are the most qualified person to give this talk?" should really be answered before the person gets up to speak. And if the answer is, "I'm not, but the person who is doesn't want to evangelize", fine. But yes, consider why you're speaking. That's fine. Otherwise, the message is a load of drivel.
- danmg 7y ago
  It's bandwagoning. When someone uses that phrasing you can safely ignore what they're saying.
teh_klev 7y ago
I've been to a few developer conferences in the UK over the years with "famous names" on the bill. But I don't remember detecting any of the speakers having overly burgeoning egos. In fact I got to speak to a quite a few of these folks at lunch time (most, if not all, ate lunch with the attendees as well), breaks and post conference; and in these encounters so none of these folks made me feel "they were too important" to speak to me. Sure some of the folks have a certain "showmanship" on stage such as back in the day Don Box (and his bath full of SOAP) and these days Scott Hanselman at NDC or Build. But that's fine, they make what could be a dull presentation highly entertaining and you're learning some stuff as well. Maybe this is a US thing (seeing as the author seems to be based in the US) or certain types of conferences (WordPress conferences?)?
RuleOfBirds 7y ago
Huh. Is it just me? I couldn't make it through more than a screen of this post because of the author's ego that seemed to be spilling out the sides of their mouth. I didn't "read to the end" like admonished, so not sure if it was meant to be humorous.
- monksy 7y ago
  I felt like it was a bit preachy and "only listen to me" kind of a tone. I agree with you. If he had articulated his point better I would have liked it. I really hate the ego of the author to suggest that you shouldn't speak on something and should "mentor someone 'underrepsented'." Sigh. If you put the work into the talk, know it really well, and you're enthusastic, that's what's important. Be there to help others and help them prep. Give talks on how to give a talk.
- willyg123 7y ago
  I thought the author was sincere after the first read. I read it after reading your comment and respectfully disagree about the author's ego. I have never been a conference speaker so perhaps I am not the best judge.
  - letstrynvm 7y ago
    I skipped the rest after his trying to equate concluding you're not going to get accepted to a particular conference with 'ego'. Having self-respect and deciding not to keep uselessly abasing yourself to a clique that's never going to anoint you is perfectly reasonable. As the previous poster said the article author seems over-blessed with ego thinking he knows enough to hand out blanket advice putting the fault on others.
jimjag 7y ago
Blog Writers, Check Your Egos
- diag 7y ago
  Seems like the author didn't feel the irony while writing this post.
- algaeontoast 7y ago
  Reading this I could only really picture the angered author muttering "I AM the Blog Who Knocks!".
ravenstine 7y ago
Conferences don't exist to convey information. You can learn stuff from conferences, but I don't think I've ever been to one where people were talking about things that weren't already publicly available on the internet. (An exception might be conferences like Apple's WWDC, since that's a place for the company to announce proprietary info) When people attend conferences, they're doing it to be seen. That's true whether you're on stage or off. Everyone thinks they're awesome, or if they don't then they probably want to be awesome. People with big egos, though we get jealous of them, get big attention. If you act important, chances are you'll make people think you're important. It's all business. If you're at a talk that's truly unbearable, just tune out or walk out if it's that bad. I've done this a bunch of times when a person's egotism is too cringy or when some malcontent is being way too preachy. The latter seems to becoming more common. Barf. Sorry, you're not making me pay thousands for this shit so I can be told I'm dumb. Check your egos? Why are you even going to conferences?
- gameoflife 7y ago
  Agree. I've noticed that most speakers don't actually convey any information, instead just exploring some very basic idea in way too much depth. Just lots of fluff really. Also agree with others though, that conferences have their uses for meeting people which does result in knowledge exchange.
- eanzenberg 7y ago
  This is so incorrect and for some mainly subtle reasons. Many times companies (and people) don't publicly want to expose the details of what they're doing or working on. That said, at conferences many "off-the-record" conversations happen that are extremely valuable. How often can you spend days together with peers from other companies? That IMO is the real value of going.
  - AJ007 7y ago
    There is a profound difference between research and sales conferences, to the extent it seems wrong to even use the same word to describe them.
- 7y ago
darkwater 7y ago
Well, I dare to say that almost every conference speaker has at least a "sufficiently sized" ego. Otherwise they won't be speaking at a conference about $topic.
crabasa 7y ago
I'm a conference organizer, and I'm not sure what I just read. I feel there must be some angry emails or negative interactions that led to this blog post. I'd encourage the author to consider if there is anything they can do to attract different kinds of people to their CFP or perhaps manage expectations better? One thing we did with our most recent CFP [1] was to reply individually [2] to each person who submitted with constructive feedback on their submission. I think transparency and respect goes a long way. [1] https://2019.cascadiajs.com/cfp https://2019.cascadiajs.com/cfp [2] https://twitter.com/crtr0/status/1156602180763152385 https://twitter.com/crtr0/status/1156602180763152385
- sgrove 7y ago
  Replying to each submission is very impressive! Looks like last year you had ~24 speakers, so I assume you had ~100+ submissions. That's definitely dedication! Have you run into speakers responding negatively to your (constructive) feedback before?
  - crabasa 7y ago
    Not really. But to be honest, I think people who are upset with the rejection or the feedback are not likely to share that with me. I like to think that how we message the CFP and how we manage the process and communication with submitters decreases the chance of people being overly upset with the outcome.
bjornsing 7y ago
I really don’t understand this preoccupation with policing “humility” in others... Some seem to think that if you don’t have impostor syndrome you’re a scumbag or something... Can anyone explain?

> if you ARE the only person capable of giving the talk then is there is a diversity issue. Can you take an honest look at the diversity of your industry and perhaps mentor new ones – especially those from under represented groups – to be able to speak on such topics? This seems a bit bizarre to me. Sure, they're the only one who knows right now, but they are giving a talk at a conference, which is supposed to have the purpose of educating a large number of people.

monksy 7y ago
I got the feeling the author was saying: "Step out of the way for what ever group we feel is marginalized today" It's such a regressive statement. If you know what you're talking about and are excited about it. YOU ARE THE RIGHT PERSON. The people who are at the conference and speaking are people who stepped up to do it. You don't just get this granted pass to be up there.
gav 7y ago
Some of the best talks I've seen are along the lines of "nobody cares about X but me, and here's why _you_ should care about it" or "I'm the only person who has attempted Y (and lived/succeeded) and here's what happened". If a lot of people could give the talk, it wouldn't be that interesting. Giving talks is often the first step at getting the message out.
drak0n1c 7y ago
My spouse plans conferences. Her event planning team is mostly women. Most of the speakers at their conferences are men - the main reason why is because many women candidates refuse the opportunity. An attendee who loudly complained about diversity became more understanding after being invited to help recruit speakers. The ego shouldn't be checked - it should be encouraged if you want more people to want to be conference speakers.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

mikelyons 7y ago

Your ego isn't something you just "check" People toss around the word ego with zero understanding of what ego is and how it functions. YOUR VERY SURVIVAL IS AT STAKE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8NNtpzYQx8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8NNtpzYQx8 But how developed does your consciousness have to be to even begin to grasp it?

Endy 7y ago

I hate the phrase, "check your [facet of personality]." I have asked people to examine their motivations, and I always will - because saying, "why do you believe you are the most qualified person to give this talk?" should really be answered before the person gets up to speak. And if the answer is, "I'm not, but the person who is doesn't want to evangelize", fine. But yes, consider why you're speaking. That's fine. Otherwise, the message is a load of drivel.

danmg 7y ago
It's bandwagoning. When someone uses that phrasing you can safely ignore what they're saying.

teh_klev 7y ago

I've been to a few developer conferences in the UK over the years with "famous names" on the bill. But I don't remember detecting any of the speakers having overly burgeoning egos. In fact I got to speak to a quite a few of these folks at lunch time (most, if not all, ate lunch with the attendees as well), breaks and post conference; and in these encounters so none of these folks made me feel "they were too important" to speak to me. Sure some of the folks have a certain "showmanship" on stage such as back in the day Don Box (and his bath full of SOAP) and these days Scott Hanselman at NDC or Build. But that's fine, they make what could be a dull presentation highly entertaining and you're learning some stuff as well. Maybe this is a US thing (seeing as the author seems to be based in the US) or certain types of conferences (WordPress conferences?)?

RuleOfBirds 7y ago

Huh. Is it just me? I couldn't make it through more than a screen of this post because of the author's ego that seemed to be spilling out the sides of their mouth. I didn't "read to the end" like admonished, so not sure if it was meant to be humorous.

monksy 7y ago
I felt like it was a bit preachy and "only listen to me" kind of a tone. I agree with you. If he had articulated his point better I would have liked it. I really hate the ego of the author to suggest that you shouldn't speak on something and should "mentor someone 'underrepsented'." Sigh. If you put the work into the talk, know it really well, and you're enthusastic, that's what's important. Be there to help others and help them prep. Give talks on how to give a talk.
willyg123 7y ago
I thought the author was sincere after the first read. I read it after reading your comment and respectfully disagree about the author's ego. I have never been a conference speaker so perhaps I am not the best judge.
- letstrynvm 7y ago
  I skipped the rest after his trying to equate concluding you're not going to get accepted to a particular conference with 'ego'. Having self-respect and deciding not to keep uselessly abasing yourself to a clique that's never going to anoint you is perfectly reasonable. As the previous poster said the article author seems over-blessed with ego thinking he knows enough to hand out blanket advice putting the fault on others.

jimjag 7y ago

Blog Writers, Check Your Egos

diag 7y ago
Seems like the author didn't feel the irony while writing this post.
algaeontoast 7y ago
Reading this I could only really picture the angered author muttering "I AM the Blog Who Knocks!".

ravenstine 7y ago

Conferences don't exist to convey information. You can learn stuff from conferences, but I don't think I've ever been to one where people were talking about things that weren't already publicly available on the internet. (An exception might be conferences like Apple's WWDC, since that's a place for the company to announce proprietary info) When people attend conferences, they're doing it to be seen. That's true whether you're on stage or off. Everyone thinks they're awesome, or if they don't then they probably want to be awesome. People with big egos, though we get jealous of them, get big attention. If you act important, chances are you'll make people think you're important. It's all business. If you're at a talk that's truly unbearable, just tune out or walk out if it's that bad. I've done this a bunch of times when a person's egotism is too cringy or when some malcontent is being way too preachy. The latter seems to becoming more common. Barf. Sorry, you're not making me pay thousands for this shit so I can be told I'm dumb. Check your egos? Why are you even going to conferences?

gameoflife 7y ago
Agree. I've noticed that most speakers don't actually convey any information, instead just exploring some very basic idea in way too much depth. Just lots of fluff really. Also agree with others though, that conferences have their uses for meeting people which does result in knowledge exchange.
eanzenberg 7y ago
This is so incorrect and for some mainly subtle reasons. Many times companies (and people) don't publicly want to expose the details of what they're doing or working on. That said, at conferences many "off-the-record" conversations happen that are extremely valuable. How often can you spend days together with peers from other companies? That IMO is the real value of going.
- AJ007 7y ago
  There is a profound difference between research and sales conferences, to the extent it seems wrong to even use the same word to describe them.
7y ago

darkwater 7y ago

Well, I dare to say that almost every conference speaker has at least a "sufficiently sized" ego. Otherwise they won't be speaking at a conference about $topic.

crabasa 7y ago

I'm a conference organizer, and I'm not sure what I just read. I feel there must be some angry emails or negative interactions that led to this blog post. I'd encourage the author to consider if there is anything they can do to attract different kinds of people to their CFP or perhaps manage expectations better? One thing we did with our most recent CFP [1] was to reply individually [2] to each person who submitted with constructive feedback on their submission. I think transparency and respect goes a long way. [1] https://2019.cascadiajs.com/cfp https://2019.cascadiajs.com/cfp [2] https://twitter.com/crtr0/status/1156602180763152385 https://twitter.com/crtr0/status/1156602180763152385

sgrove 7y ago
Replying to each submission is very impressive! Looks like last year you had ~24 speakers, so I assume you had ~100+ submissions. That's definitely dedication! Have you run into speakers responding negatively to your (constructive) feedback before?
- crabasa 7y ago
  Not really. But to be honest, I think people who are upset with the rejection or the feedback are not likely to share that with me. I like to think that how we message the CFP and how we manage the process and communication with submitters decreases the chance of people being overly upset with the outcome.

bjornsing 7y ago

I really don’t understand this preoccupation with policing “humility” in others... Some seem to think that if you don’t have impostor syndrome you’re a scumbag or something... Can anyone explain?