Could it really be better than the first one? I wasn’t there. I just don’t see how you could have fun without me Russ…

We will definitely have to hook up on the next one…you owe me a beer.

@Justice~!
I didn’t have the heart to propose “How to be a better looking programmer.” That seemed to be best done by, well, you.

@Justice~! Out of 150 attendees, I am pretty sure your name came up in EVERY conversation at least once. I would love to see this MVC presentation you did at DevTeach that is now legendary.

I’ll be organizing the next one in Austin. Sorry you’ll miss it.

Don’t worry Russ. We’ll just put a wig on you and call you “Justice Gray”.

Start practicing your metrosexual strut.

I don’t understand where Scott’s coming from. He knows this. We don’t see eye to eye.

In the closing, I made the comment that Organizers are not the same as Leaders. I consider myself a leader in certain categories, yes, but in this context I consider myself an organizer.

I consider Scott a leader, a true revolutionary. He’s often ahead of the curve in terms of knowing where trends lie. I’ve learned a great deal from him and he’s turned me on to a number of things well ahead of where I’ve found them.

What bothers me, though, is that he’s cast us as not analyzing. He calls this a club. Sure, there’s a club element. Is there a danger to that? I don’t see it. I think we’re still giving shit where shit’s due. I think we’ve moved passed issues of “cool kid club” and “identification” and “attachment.” Seattle was 100% about questioning and understanding how we can get better. It filled me with hope.

I might be wrong, and don’t get me wrong, Scott’s among my best friends, but damn if he isn’t confrontational and singular in his vision. There’s nothing wrong with feeling positive about our little movement. There’s nothing wrong with growing that and reaching out. When we achieve a certain level, it’ll be easier to win acknowledgment for our cause and create a larger environment for “Continuous Improvement.”

@Max

The gathering wasn’t like this at all. You should know that. It was very positive and productive. You shouldn’t weigh the gathering from this comment exchange.

I’m not sure I understand the tone of your comment, I suppose. To be clear: I’m in agreement with Russel’s commentary here, frustrated by accusations of “surface analysis,” and disappointed by Scott’s choice of retort.

/ Dave

@Laribee –

No, we are on the same page. The gathering was even more transparent this time around due to video and twitter, and I found myself jealous for not attending. I am sure the conversation and civility was equal if not greater than the first.

It is this type of “kicked up dust” that happens after the events that is lame. This is why ALT.NET purse fight guy has reasons to blog – we keep pissing in each others eye on the email thread and in blogs. Sometimes to much passion leads to the inability to just let idle comments slide…

Don’t forget Philly as an option! Although, I know to really make it an option, I’ll have to put my money where my mouth is and start organizing.

Frankly, I’m glad that more people are calling Scott out. If there’s one thing the ALT.NET gatherings have taught me, it’s that this is a community that almost unanimously is interested in engaging, learning, tackling misperceptions, and working toward a common good.

I feel that Scott deflects many opportunities to engage and educate and instead chooses to berate and emasculate, which is self-defeating. The community benefits from people engaging, whether they are trying to learn, challenge, or agree. Smacking them in the mouth may make you feel superior, but it’s not going to help you create the “united front” you desire. What it does succeed in doing is making people less interested in engaging.

I completely agree with Dave about Scott being a leader, incredibly passionate, intelligent, even inspiring. I like being around him, in person, and learning from him. I wish I could engage with him and learn from him more. Unfortunately, I don’t support the way he treats many people who I feel are trying to take positive steps, but aren’t in immediate compliance with his criteria. He’s informed me that this is a position of naivete. I discussed this briefly in person at the ALT.NET “Leadership Summit” during one of the sessions, using JP Boodhoo as an example of someone who I think is an incredible leader and activist, who manages to change developers dramatically via positive interactions. I’ve had a few debates about it in more public forums like Twitter, one of his favorite places to go on the attack, because he has an audience and is masterful at public emasculation.

I haven’t seen much hope in getting him to adjust his approach, and I think he enjoys viewing himself as a lion in a herd of sheep. My hope is that the community can continue to move forward in a positive, inclusive way, and not let his tantrums deter us from the message which, while undoubtedly having received great contributions from Scott, is not owned nor decided entirely by him.

Brian,

Your analysis isn’t well-considered or well-factored. I see in you a predisposition to community social climbing and opportunism. I’m disappointed in the effort you put into thinking through your conclusion. You can and should do better.

This thread presents a number of clear demonstrations of the sub-optimizing intellectual and behavioral qualities that I personally feel are always waiting in the wings in the alt.net community.

Suppressing craven behaviors or not having the opportunities to express them doesn’t mean that courage has taken root. This community is still far too predisposed to craven opportunism.

The lingering behavioral cancers in the alt.net community aren’t cured. They sleep waiting for the next trigger and the subsequent relapse, as demonstrated here.

I want to organize an event in Austin that follows the path of the first event that I organized in Austin. In many respects, I hope that it won’t be like other events that you’ve attended – not even like events of my own doing that you’ve attended, as the Austin 07 event hopefully was.

I want to get together with people who are looking to give no quarter when it comes to the predispositions to the craven behavior that keeps continuous improvement artificially suppressed.

The Austin event isn’t – as I’ve said – another alt.net club meeting – a club that I’m on the inside of and have no qualms criticizing. I’m confident that others can replicate those kinds of events at will. They’re cookie-cutter events from a conception and organization perspective. My purpose isn’t best served by re-trodding trails that I’ve already been on for some time.

Setting up last year’s event in Austin was pathfinding work. This year’s Austin event will be more pathfinding work – otherwise, I see no point. If you are personally invested in attending an event that is a large-scale alt.net user group open spaces meeting, then the Austin event may not be for you.

I am personally interested in attending more events like Austin 07 and Seattle, but those events don’t really need much pathfinding to make them happen, and anyone in the community should be able to organize them at this point.

The event in Austin is specially meant to address hard issues in continuous improvement – including predispositions toward shallow opportunism that some of this post and its commentary are exemplary of. That is what I see as the next step, and that is where I hope the event in Austin will go. If it doesn’t go there, no sweat – the right people will come and the right thing will happen.

We will be talking about tools and practices again in Austin, but not exclusively, and we’ll hopefully be talking about them within the context of continuous improvement.

I’m suggesting that members of the community search themselves for a considered understanding of whether they are the right people for this event. Again, this isn’t a user-group styled open space we’re talking about. If that’s the kind of thing you want, then don’t waste your time on the Austin event. The law of two feet is sacred and in effect.

No one is black-listed, but consider whether the open spaces event in Austin in the fall is the event that is right for you. If you have questions or doubts, call me up and talk to me about it. We can figure out together whether your interest and investment is commensurate with the intentions of the gathering.

I’m glad that you guys enjoyed Seattle. Your enjoyment of the event is yet more encouragement to me that the encounters and gatherings that I continue conceive of are on the right path. For those of you who chose to not come to Austin, we’ll see you at the next Open Conf styled event.

Max,

I don’t think I stated anywhere that I’m immune to innate cowardliness.

I didn’t blow my top at the criticism. I didn’t blow my top, and I’m disappointed in the quality of the analysis and conclusions rather than an instance of criticism.

I appreciate criticism and welcome it, and you’d be hard-pressed to find someone who has meaningfully engaged with me who would refute this.

My intention here isn’t to be a dick. I’m at peace with this.

I’m glad that you appreciate the diversity in Philly ALT.NET. It has always been a goal and a good part of my action and work in community organization to set stages for diversity. I’m glad to see the manifestations of this radiating from early, explicit efforts and considerations. I hope to increase diversity even more at the event in Austin.

What you see as “pithy, abstract twitterisms” is in fact the way I talk. Sorry that I can’t help you here. Would that I could go back in time and make my schooling more commensurate with what would eventually become the American expectations for English comprehension.

Aaaaaand… Curtain.