Comments on: Why hybrid events aren’t going away soon Unconferences, peer conferences, participant-driven events, and facilitation Sat, 21 Mar 2020 02:12:30 +0000 hourly 1 By: Adrian Segar Wed, 02 Feb 2011 18:12:00 +0000 In reply to moreconference.

Chris and/or Francis (hey, which one of you wrote the comment?!), I take a more charitable view of teleconferencing vendors, namely that they are understandably trying to promote their technology as a way of extending event and meeting options. I can’t fault them for that.

I do believe that virtual meeting technology can effectively substitute for certain kinds of in-person meetings, such as technical briefings, progress reporting, novice training etc. And I do believe that hybrid events can bring a strong flavor of a face-to-face event to remote attendees, and that this can have real value.

But you’re right; nothing can currently surpass being in the same room with people. When teleconferencing advocates claim that they will soon be able to provide remote attendees the same experience as local attendees, well, that’s when my BS detector gets activated.

By: moreconference Mon, 31 Jan 2011 18:06:00 +0000 I agree with you Adrian. The fact is there are lots of big companies like Cisco who are trying to spread the idea that virtual events can replace face-to-face meetups – but only so that they can peddle their high-cost solutions. Isn’t the truth that nothing can surpass talking in person – and there will always be value in doing this? In my view the best hybrid solutions will support face-to-face meetings, rather than attempt to replace them.