Of recent years the idea of the un-conference has started to be a theme of many an on-line conversation. Such events involve the coming together of people interested in a topic or subject, often at their own expense in which anyone is a potential speaker and the process of the event itself is emergent. This I find exciting, although some of its advocates (I will not name names) appear to be more motivated in their advocacy of the idea by their past failure to get keynote status at a conventional conference or to be invited back following a first foray as a main tent speaker. If you read the reports of un-conferences you often find that the leading figures in the field, if present are the ones talked about. I find the idea and the practice refreshing, not as a replacement for the conventional conference but as a complement. We could do with more un-conferences and fewer conferences, but that is an issue of balance and completeness not replacement. Nor should we attempt to privilege one form over another, they are different and serve different purposes.

I have another blog which has been a month or so in preparation and is still not complete, in fact it may become a paper. Its subject is the way in which open-space events and world cafes, while well motivated and often well run, can too easily be manipulated by the socially adept and pander to the ego of facilitation. That blog/article will also look at some of the ways in which we have started to use complexity theory to create new forms (and which probably need new names) for mass participation events.

In the mean time we have this new instrument for forced collaboration: the conference bike. I prepared to bet that in mass use, the issue over who steers and who pedals would soon emerge. Thanks to Cynthia for finding this news item