STC conference redux

Subject: STC conference redux
From: "Hart, Geoff" <Geoff-H -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 14:05:22 -0500


This topic arises every year, and generates roughly equal parts heat and
light. My take on this:

First, I've reported these comments to STC pretty much annually, and
suggested that some re-evaluation of the approach is in order. The problem
(if you want to call it that) is that the current system works amply well
for their needs, and given that conference attendance exceeds 10% of the
total membership in a good year, the conferences seem to be meeting the
needs of members quite well.

Second, any conference is only worth what you bring to it. If you attend
expecting to be spoonfed and to have turnkey solutions handed to you, you
can expect to be disappointed. Don't forget: there's a significant
difference between a conference (a bunch of people swapping information) and
a training session (highly focused hands on work, often with specific
tools). I get value from STC conferences by reigniting my enthusiasm by
talking to endless numbers of colleagues about a huge range of topics, and
by learning how others are dealing with problems. If I speak at the
conference, that's just a way for me to bounce my ideas off a critical
audience and stimulate more direct interaction with colleagues.

Third, you have to do your homework before attending. The conference
schedule is usually available well before you have to decide whether to go.
Taking a close look at the schedule will tell you which sessions are
relevant to your current work, and which ones aren't. If there are enough
things you're interested in, go; if not, wait a year. In many cases, the
opportunity to talk to speakers between sessions is worth the price of
admission all by itself.

Fourth, STC can't be all things to all people and probably shouldn't try.
For example, I'm a member of the scientific communication SIG, edit and
publish the newsletter, and run the (very quiet) e-mail group. But given
that we have only around 800 members (less than 5% of the total membership),
it's hardly surprising that STC conferences don't focus on scientific
communication; other organisations do that. But I've often found that
applying the lessons learned in other disciplines is a very productive way
to improve my own work.

--Geoff Hart, geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada
580 boul. St-Jean
Pointe-Claire, Que., H9R 3J9 Canada

"By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is
noblest; second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third, by experience,
which is the bitterest."--Confucius, philosopher and teacher (c. 551-478
BCE)


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you using Doc-to-Help or ForeHelp? Switch to RoboHelp for Word for $249
or to RoboHelp Office for only $499. Get the PC Magazine five-star rated
Help authoring tool for less! Go to http://www.ehelp.com/techwr

Free copy of ARTS PDF Tools when you register for the PDF
Conference by April 30. Leading-Edge Practices for Enterprise
& Government, June 3-5, Bethesda,MD. www.PDFConference.com

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.


Previous by Author: Describing range - use of from/between?
Next by Author: When is it right to be wrong?
Previous by Thread: Re: STC Conference Speakers
Next by Thread: Re: STC conference redux


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads