More SXSW aftermath...another podcast and panel rankings
A few more tidbits from SXSW (the podcasts will be trickling out over weeks and weeks.)
First, here's the mp3 file of the "We Got Naked, Now What? or How to Get Naked at Work" session.
I have to point something out, mostly out of embarassment. It seems that they edited out the questions from the audience, probably because they had no mics to capture said questions properly for audio. After every question I repeated the question, and often it went back and forth with the questioner, as I tried to get their full story.
Consequently some of this recording sounds like me talking to myself! Seriously.
Note to self...doublecheck the number of mics we'll have for the attendees at BlogHer, so every comment and question can be heard!
On another note SXSW has done something I would consider worthy of controversy...they've released a SXSW Panel Honor Roll, a list of those sessions which received a 4 out of 5 or higher on attendee ranking cards.
I'm pleased that most of our BlogHer sessions (and many of the other sessions in which BlogHers and friends of BlogHer participated) are on this list. Perhaps our most controversial session was the "Increasing Women's Visibility" session, which is tied with 5 other sessions and received a 5 out of 5 ranking. Of course then you'll note that all of the 6 sessions with that perfect score had less than 10 people turn in the response card!!! Considering how many people attended, it's a pretty poor response ratio.
I've certainly never seen a conference do this post-conference before. Esepcially given the small number of response cards they collected I have to look askance at this list in general. They include their own note of caution in the post, but is that enough?
What do you think of the practice? Would you want us to publish such results after our post-conference survey? As an attendee? As a speaker?
Interested to see what you all think.