On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Hank Chapot <hchapot(a)igc.org> wrote:
I think there is some validity to your last point. I
went to one meetup
in San Francisco and walked away thinking, what exactly are those folks
trying to do? We had no real purpose, or maybe I missed it, and maybe
folks were just looking for social experience. an agenda sounds too
formal, but what else are we there for? Besides, the insiders who
seemed to already know each other kind of huddled off from the crowd.
I had two issues relating to my own experience as a wikipedia content
provider that I wanted to talk about, and one was answered quickly and
the other never came up. Then the assembled went to a restaurant and I
hopped on BART somewhat perplexed.
So, if this is a community, some form or shared world-view or
acknowledged reason for meeting would be helpful, and I've got my
ideas.
One thing about meetups -- at least as I'm familiar with them -- is
that the agenda (formal or otherwise) should always be open. If you'd
like to run a gathering focussed on content issues, then by all means!
I think a lot of people would be interested in that. Really, just
calling such a meeting and doing the minimal planning work is all that
is needed to make it happen. I think meetups can become whatever
people want it to be. I have always enjoyed purely social meetups --
just as a chance to meet and chat with like-minded people -- but that
is certainly not the only alternative.
As for the last meetup at the ferry building, it was rather distracted
-- which is partly if not mostly my fault, for not picking a better
venue and for not trying to keep the group together longer. In a
quieter place (a restaurant with a private room, an office, a
coffeeshop or library room) people would certainly have more engaged
and focussed conversations.
Speaking of ... it's about time for the next one, no?
cheers,
phoebe