4 ms·
While they would have done well to add another line or two of explanation, I think when you get down to it, you will find a decent argument against allowing thi
by zaidf 14y ago
While they would have done well to add another line or two of explanation, I think when you get down to it, you will find a decent argument against allowing this. Immediately, I can think about how the mere nature of festivals would make it difficult to comply with prior rules or make it easier to compromise them. For example, any festival has sponsorship guidelines; I think it is fair to say that most festivals cannot be trusted to observe a different set of guidelines just for the TEDx event.
Now, may be you have a problem with other rules(such as sponsors not speaking) but I think TED can make a compelling case for the role of individual rules in establishing them as a trusted, quality brand.
- politician 14y agoI don't have a problem with the other rules which seem like reasonably standard brand protection. However, the subtle anti-community message that the prohibition against student-lead participation conveys is contrary to the overt pro-community messages communicated by the rest of the letter. Although it might be as you say that these student events aren't run by students so much as for students by festival operators. In which case, I'd tend to agree with you.
- intended 14y agoStudent fests here are a big thing, and their branding easily can out shadow the TedX event itself. TedX would then be just a side show, and addition to the original event. Its an issue of co-branding, and not being part of the ethos of TedX, i.e. giving back to the community. It would be just another college event.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]