Blogging about these presentations makes me go over my very brief notes à la Twitter and it is a formal exercise I have imposed on myself. I describe the sequence of events/what I have heard as objectively as one possibly can so as to later analyze this in the best Cartesian tradition. I must admit it is extremely difficult for me as I tend to focus more on the context and am particularly sensitive to all the meta that surrounds these occasions: environment, colours, arrangement, atmosphere, discourse and the way people behave and present their thoughts. In addition to this, even though adjectives and adverbs may make a post more lively and interesting, I will refrain from using them so as not to bias the report.
I do make a quick comment here and there of what struck me as significative or important at particular moments but I am trying not to insert, at least at this time, my perception of the event as this is coloured by my own lenses of the world and open to discussion. I am totally aware, though, that my choice of words and how I have decided to inform you about this may also demonstrate this insight.
An aside – on the technology track now, it would be interesting if there were a tool which allowed for side annotations of these parallel trains of thought.
Well, enough of philosophy and let me get back to my homework and proceed with reporting on the two afternoon presentations.
Quick update some two hours later: now that I look at the post from outside, the blog does not seem the best layout either as it people would have to start reading it upside down or rather down upside to make sense of what I am referring to. I suppose normally people would report on this at one go…