I don't really get his point - these credibility of these camps etc. are entirely founded on relevance. If Tim O'Reilly wants to have a closed conference that's his choice. The risk he runs if they're only getting people who share their views is potential death by echo chamber.
This is why events like BarCamp (and the various *Camp offspring) came about. I don't see the risk for Web 2.0 because last I checked the community was alive, talking and interacting quite actively (Look at BarCampEarth last weekend - 10+ cities having simulatneous camps). I'm sure Dave would be more then welcome to come to his local Camp and do a session on "Why O'Reilly is doomed to Fail" or whatever else he is concerned about at the time.
Sounds more like a case of someone's invite getting "lost" in the mail.
Mathew Ingram
· 3 years ago
Thanks for the comment, Ryan. I agree. Seems like a typical "sour grapes" response - although I think you are right that O'Reilly's exclusivity runs the risk of turning FOO Camp into an echo chamber.
Seb
· 3 years ago
We should launch a FOM (friends of MESH) Camp in Canada! :-)
Mathew Ingram
· 3 years ago
Seb, that is an excellent idea.
Markus
· 3 years ago
Should be no great surprise he is banned. He has got to be the rudest meanest person I have ever met.
Brian McConnell
· 3 years ago
I am a long-time O'Reilly author and FOO Camp attendee (wasn't invited this year, no sour grapes either).
FOO Camp started out as an extended company party for staff, editors, authors and interesting people who'd been involved in or written about by the company. Tim's company has been publishing books about and promoting open source technology for a _long_ time, so he's picked up some influential friends along the way (most of whom were nobodies 10 years ago by the way).
The first two years I went, it wasn't an "a list" party, mostly it was a mix of authors, editors and people from the open source community hanging out, sharing ideas, and drinking. Last year, some people got their panties in a bunch over the invite list, and the event took on an importance that was never intended. I understand that people felt left out, but the event wouldn't work with 1000 people, and I give credit to Tim for not trying to turn it into TED, where people can pay several grand to have a drink with Larry Page. Instead he invited an interesting mix of nameless people doing interesting work, and big name people who had done interesting work.
Either way, it's his party and I am glad he decided to do it. Whether you agree with everything he does, O'Reilly is a pioneer, and was out promoting open source, and publishing books about topics nobody cared about (Python for example) long before they became important technologies.
Mathew Ingram
· 3 years ago
Thanks for the comment, Brian. It's good to get an insider's view of how FOO Camp started.
All Comments
This is why events like BarCamp (and the various *Camp offspring) came about. I don't see the risk for Web 2.0 because last I checked the community was alive, talking and interacting quite actively (Look at BarCampEarth last weekend - 10+ cities having simulatneous camps). I'm sure Dave would be more then welcome to come to his local Camp and do a session on "Why O'Reilly is doomed to Fail" or whatever else he is concerned about at the time.
Sounds more like a case of someone's invite getting "lost" in the mail.
FOO Camp started out as an extended company party for staff, editors, authors and interesting people who'd been involved in or written about by the company. Tim's company has been publishing books about and promoting open source technology for a _long_ time, so he's picked up some influential friends along the way (most of whom were nobodies 10 years ago by the way).
The first two years I went, it wasn't an "a list" party, mostly it was a mix of authors, editors and people from the open source community hanging out, sharing ideas, and drinking. Last year, some people got their panties in a bunch over the invite list, and the event took on an importance that was never intended. I understand that people felt left out, but the event wouldn't work with 1000 people, and I give credit to Tim for not trying to turn it into TED, where people can pay several grand to have a drink with Larry Page. Instead he invited an interesting mix of nameless people doing interesting work, and big name people who had done interesting work.
Either way, it's his party and I am glad he decided to do it. Whether you agree with everything he does, O'Reilly is a pioneer, and was out promoting open source, and publishing books about topics nobody cared about (Python for example) long before they became important technologies.