Why I cancelled my TechEd talks(goodenoughsoftware.net)
goodenoughsoftware.net
Why I cancelled my TechEd talks
http://goodenoughsoftware.net/2013/07/18/the-charlie-foxtrot-aka-teched/
185 comments
They mandated the color of pants speakers wore.
Am I really reading this? Wow.
Am I really reading this? Wow.
Khakis, with brown shoes. Not tennis shoes, although trendy sneakers (but not athletic shoes) would be considered.
The most insulting part: the Microsoft keynote speakers - MS employees - were in jeans and track suits. They were trying to look approachable. Hilarious because you couldn't approach them and ask a question during keynotes.
The most insulting part: the Microsoft keynote speakers - MS employees - were in jeans and track suits. They were trying to look approachable. Hilarious because you couldn't approach them and ask a question during keynotes.
I'm a Microsoft employee who has spoken at one TechEd and staffed a booth at another. Rest assured, the style cops were all over us to conform to the dress code. I can believe that there's a different standard for keynote speakers, who are usually notable or "important" in some way.
The colour was fine for an emperor. We know who wears the real pants in this "relationship".
Apparently you were really reading that. I don't think dress code is out of the question though. Thong swimsuits would be a horrible thing to speak in.
Nop. Have you seen the talk on SOAP fro Don Box (another Microsoft employee): http://blog.mattmags.com/2011/05/19/don-box-the-bathtub-lect... ? If above dress code thing is true then Microsoft has came long way...
I'm guessing that was a typo, but NOP as an instruction is kind of fitting in this situation, too.
Realistically, what would they do if you showed up in jeans? "Sorry folks, the talk is cancelled. Your speaker decided to wear jeans today."?
That is the sort of bullshit that I always call bluffs on. Worse case scenario you get someone all huffy and upset that their rule has been ignored (making them feel unimportant, as they should), and you give them a "whoops, too bad."
That is the sort of bullshit that I always call bluffs on. Worse case scenario you get someone all huffy and upset that their rule has been ignored (making them feel unimportant, as they should), and you give them a "whoops, too bad."
> Realistically, what would they do if you showed up in jeans?
Nothing at that talk, but you may not be on the invite list for next time. Microsoft's invite list for TechEd is notoriously political. The leader for each track (an MS employee) picks the session list.
To give an extreme example, one of my submissions was called something like "Fixing Slow SQL Servers." I was told, "At TechEd, there are no slow SQL Servers." It was changed to Building the Fastest SQL Servers. (sigh)
Nothing at that talk, but you may not be on the invite list for next time. Microsoft's invite list for TechEd is notoriously political. The leader for each track (an MS employee) picks the session list.
To give an extreme example, one of my submissions was called something like "Fixing Slow SQL Servers." I was told, "At TechEd, there are no slow SQL Servers." It was changed to Building the Fastest SQL Servers. (sigh)
Check
I just created a list of conferences to never attend too.
I live in the real world.
I just created a list of conferences to never attend too.
I live in the real world.
Well, if you are planning on not giving further anyway talks because of how you are being treated, then there is probably very little harm in not being invited in the future.
IMHO, life is too short to donate time to people who are going to treat you like a child.
IMHO, life is too short to donate time to people who are going to treat you like a child.
Agreed, and as I mentioned in the first comment, that's why I quit presenting. There's enough places to volunteer my time already - no need to do it there.
I agree in spirit, but not details. The dress code is what's unimportant, not the person trying to manage the speakers.
The way I look at it is that anyone who gets upset over trivial details like that is almost certainly unimportant. If they were important, then calling their bluff on something so minor wouldn't be taken as an attack on their usefulness. Minor things only become major things if the person demanding them has nothing better to do.
99.9% of the time when you call peoples' bluff on stupid shit like pant color at a talk, nobody cares. Most people who demand that sort of thing have better things to be worrying about.
99.9% of the time when you call peoples' bluff on stupid shit like pant color at a talk, nobody cares. Most people who demand that sort of thing have better things to be worrying about.
I wonder if blog posts like this will cause some kind of reform. I was under the impression that Microsoft was aware of how important keeping 3rd-party developers happy is toward the long-term success of any OS or platform they publish.
> I was under the impression that Microsoft was aware of how important keeping 3rd-party developers happy
If Microsoft started alienating the very high number of Windows (desktop) developers (which is going to be higher than the OS X community for a foreseeable future), do you think they'd just abandon the platform?
If Microsoft started alienating the very high number of Windows (desktop) developers (which is going to be higher than the OS X community for a foreseeable future), do you think they'd just abandon the platform?
Most already have. Looking backward, the primary competition has been web, not OS X. Looking forward, the ascent of mobile is only making it easier to deprioritise Windows.
In terms of Windows, developers are already entrenched in the system either through lock-in or business decisions imposing Windows on them. Those types of developers are unlikely to abandon the platform no matter how much Microsoft treats them like cattle.
On the other hand, I'd say alienating the developer community would prevent hackers from making things for new(er) Microsoft platforms like Windows Phone or Azure. Things that might have been the killer app for that platform.
On the other hand, I'd say alienating the developer community would prevent hackers from making things for new(er) Microsoft platforms like Windows Phone or Azure. Things that might have been the killer app for that platform.
developers are already entrenched in the system ... Those types of developers are unlikely to abandon the platform no matter how much Microsoft treats them like cattle.
The benefit to Microsoft of having developers on-side is that those developers write applications that make Microsoft's platforms valuable to their customers.
No developer capable of writing platform-defining applications is ever tied more than casually to a specific platform.
If Microsoft alienates the developer community, Windows is dead. Whether its successor would be OS X or Linux or iOS or Android or something else entirely is hard to predict, but that is irrelevant to Microsoft's fate.
The benefit to Microsoft of having developers on-side is that those developers write applications that make Microsoft's platforms valuable to their customers.
No developer capable of writing platform-defining applications is ever tied more than casually to a specific platform.
If Microsoft alienates the developer community, Windows is dead. Whether its successor would be OS X or Linux or iOS or Android or something else entirely is hard to predict, but that is irrelevant to Microsoft's fate.
The benefit to Microsoft of having developers on-side is that those developers write applications that make Microsoft's platforms valuable to their customers.
What, Office? No. Microsoft actually writes the core software that makes their platform valuable. There are developers that provide additional value, and that's very important, but I don't think it's easy for developers to force Microsofts hand in that.
Edit: in fact, the power gradient goes the other way: as a developer of an end-user application for a PC, you still have to very strongly consider writing for Windows whether you like it or not, because of the software written by Microsoft providing the core value for customers.
What, Office? No. Microsoft actually writes the core software that makes their platform valuable. There are developers that provide additional value, and that's very important, but I don't think it's easy for developers to force Microsofts hand in that.
Edit: in fact, the power gradient goes the other way: as a developer of an end-user application for a PC, you still have to very strongly consider writing for Windows whether you like it or not, because of the software written by Microsoft providing the core value for customers.
> What, Office? No. Microsoft actually writes the core software that makes their platform valuable.
What about the thousands of games, utilities, applications that make Windows so though to eradicate from the average business? Windows RT offers little more than that core value and the market shows clearly it's a failure.
What about the thousands of games, utilities, applications that make Windows so though to eradicate from the average business? Windows RT offers little more than that core value and the market shows clearly it's a failure.
The games and utilities are there because of Office, not the other way around, and both were made in huge amounts for other systems, then retreated, and are getting ported back to e.g. macs only now (think Autodesk stuff), and this is more due to Office becoming less relevant than anything else.
No so sure I buy that.... for one thing most components of the Office suite were available (Yes, from Microsoft!) on the Mac years before they shipped for Windows.
Like you say, "thousands of games, utilities, apps".
Even if half of their 3rd party developers left they would still have thousands of apps.
Even if half of their 3rd party developers left they would still have thousands of apps.
What, Office?
There's a lot more than just Office.
I'm writing this on a Windows PC with several heavyweight software packages and plenty more lightweight tools installed, all commercial and legally purchased, that are not available on my obvious alternative platform (Linux).
However, I have little use for a heavyweight office suite. For example, most of the text-based documents I create are either plain text files or "serious" work created with more powerful tools than Word.
as a developer of an end-user application for a PC, you still have to very strongly consider writing for Windows whether you like it or not
You're begging the question. The point is that you can develop end-user applications on many other viable platforms today. Some of them, such as web apps, are also accessible from PCs. Others require different devices, but if my expected customer base already has those devices or would be willing to acquire them to use my software, that's not a problem for me.
There are obviously some advantages to writing a native application over, for example, trying to do everything in a web app. However, writing and maintaining native Windows applications is now so unpleasant compared to numerous other options -- almost entirely as a result of Microsoft's choices regarding APIs, installation/update mechanisms, and other system-level functionality -- that the path of least resistance is to use other platforms when you can and write natively for Windows only when you must. That's very bad news for Microsoft.
There's a lot more than just Office.
I'm writing this on a Windows PC with several heavyweight software packages and plenty more lightweight tools installed, all commercial and legally purchased, that are not available on my obvious alternative platform (Linux).
However, I have little use for a heavyweight office suite. For example, most of the text-based documents I create are either plain text files or "serious" work created with more powerful tools than Word.
as a developer of an end-user application for a PC, you still have to very strongly consider writing for Windows whether you like it or not
You're begging the question. The point is that you can develop end-user applications on many other viable platforms today. Some of them, such as web apps, are also accessible from PCs. Others require different devices, but if my expected customer base already has those devices or would be willing to acquire them to use my software, that's not a problem for me.
There are obviously some advantages to writing a native application over, for example, trying to do everything in a web app. However, writing and maintaining native Windows applications is now so unpleasant compared to numerous other options -- almost entirely as a result of Microsoft's choices regarding APIs, installation/update mechanisms, and other system-level functionality -- that the path of least resistance is to use other platforms when you can and write natively for Windows only when you must. That's very bad news for Microsoft.
"However, I have little use for a heavyweight office suite. For example, most of the text-based documents I create are either plain text files or "serious" work created with more powerful tools than Word."
What field are you in, if you don't mind my asking? I really can't figure out based on this statement whether or not you're in MS' target demographic.
What field are you in, if you don't mind my asking? I really can't figure out based on this statement whether or not you're in MS' target demographic.
What field are you in, if you don't mind my asking?
I work with multiple small businesses, one of which is a vehicle for consultancy/freelance work, so we have some diversity. Everything we do is using creative technologies, whether it's software development, web sites, etc.
That means we deal with a lot of technical files (but things like source code or HTML/CSS are all plain text) and a lot of client-facing documentation (but that would typically be done with software like TeX or Creative Suite and probably supplied as a PDF). That doesn't leave a lot for the middle ground where tools like Word are useful, so while we do keep LibreOffice around, it's mostly so we can read word processor documents sent to us and create the occasional simple spreadsheet, not for any of our serious creative work.
I work with multiple small businesses, one of which is a vehicle for consultancy/freelance work, so we have some diversity. Everything we do is using creative technologies, whether it's software development, web sites, etc.
That means we deal with a lot of technical files (but things like source code or HTML/CSS are all plain text) and a lot of client-facing documentation (but that would typically be done with software like TeX or Creative Suite and probably supplied as a PDF). That doesn't leave a lot for the middle ground where tools like Word are useful, so while we do keep LibreOffice around, it's mostly so we can read word processor documents sent to us and create the occasional simple spreadsheet, not for any of our serious creative work.
On the other hand, I'd say alienating the developer community would prevent hackers from making things for new(er) Microsoft platforms like Windows Phone or Azure. Things that might have been the killer app for that platform.
Hasn't that already happened though? This is Microsoft with 20 years of bad press in hacker-circles we're talking about!
Hasn't that already happened though? This is Microsoft with 20 years of bad press in hacker-circles we're talking about!
No, 20 years of froth-spitting, slathering linux crazies not understanding why reasonable people and developers choose the incredibly easy to use Windows over the ever shifting quick sand of linux.
That's obviously a bit of a joke but it is in fact all a matter of perspective. Most people think the world is populated with clones of them and their friends/colleagues.
It's not.
Until 5 years ago Macs and Linux weren't even a vaguely viable option for selling software.
That's obviously a bit of a joke but it is in fact all a matter of perspective. Most people think the world is populated with clones of them and their friends/colleagues.
It's not.
Until 5 years ago Macs and Linux weren't even a vaguely viable option for selling software.
5 years ago the web was a viable option. (Just look at Google & Facebook)
pg's "Microsoft is dead": http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html
pg's "Microsoft is dead": http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html
Color of pants, really? Just wow.
Is a dress-code for presenters really that insane in an age of such care and attention to branding?
I frequently visit pubs that tell me what shoes I'm allowed to wear! Sounds like micromanaging, but it's really just a "No singlets, no thongs [flip-flops], no visible tattoos, no sneakers, etc."
I frequently visit pubs that tell me what shoes I'm allowed to wear! Sounds like micromanaging, but it's really just a "No singlets, no thongs [flip-flops], no visible tattoos, no sneakers, etc."
You go to a pub where you are forbidden from having a visible tattoo?
I have no tattoos, and I'm shocked (a) at the existence of such a place in 2013 and (b) that anyone with a tattoo would put up with it.
I have no tattoos, and I'm shocked (a) at the existence of such a place in 2013 and (b) that anyone with a tattoo would put up with it.
Did you agree to such micromanagement in your contract?
> Did you agree to such micromanagement in your contract?
No, funny thing with TechEd - there's a million different people involved in running it, none of whom appear to know anything about the others. So you sign the contract, which is fairly innocuous, and then the crazy emails start trickling in, one at a time.
When I talked to my MS track leader about it, even he didn't know about all these meetings and the departments that we're requiring them.
At one TechEd, just after the Surfaces had been released but no technical details were out yet, I found myself in yet another mandatory speaker meeting. We were told that we weren't allowed to answer any questions about the Surface, and that instead we were to just say, "I'm very excited about what's coming."
I'm a SQL Server community guy, not an MS employee, not a Surface advocate, but that meeting was mandatory. That was the last straw.
No, funny thing with TechEd - there's a million different people involved in running it, none of whom appear to know anything about the others. So you sign the contract, which is fairly innocuous, and then the crazy emails start trickling in, one at a time.
When I talked to my MS track leader about it, even he didn't know about all these meetings and the departments that we're requiring them.
At one TechEd, just after the Surfaces had been released but no technical details were out yet, I found myself in yet another mandatory speaker meeting. We were told that we weren't allowed to answer any questions about the Surface, and that instead we were to just say, "I'm very excited about what's coming."
I'm a SQL Server community guy, not an MS employee, not a Surface advocate, but that meeting was mandatory. That was the last straw.
I can understand (though find it ridiculous) that they didn't want to give his wife a ticket, but to propose simply leaving her outside the venue alone? What the actual fuck? Was there not a human-based moment of common sense here, or at least marketing sense from Microsoft?
When people behave like that, the umbrella of some corporate behemoth doesn't prevent me from from feeling pessimistic about people (both those in question and often generally.) Sigh!
When people behave like that, the umbrella of some corporate behemoth doesn't prevent me from from feeling pessimistic about people (both those in question and often generally.) Sigh!
While I completely agree with the general sentiment and I think Microsoft went in the wrong direction here, presumably his wife is an adult and could find a Starbucks or something to entertain herself for an hour or two.
While it would have been completely reasonable and courteous of MS to accommodate the speaker's wife, it's kind of wild to equate not letting her in to kicking her to the curb/abandoning her.
While it would have been completely reasonable and courteous of MS to accommodate the speaker's wife, it's kind of wild to equate not letting her in to kicking her to the curb/abandoning her.
What would it have cost Microsoft to let his wife come inside and hang out for an hour to watch her husband speak? It wouldn't require giving away an expensive ticket, or buying meals for her, or giving her a swag bag. It would only have required one decision maker to say, "sure, you can go with him but should probably leave afterward so other attendees don't wonder what's up". That's all.
I wouldn't have been nearly so polite if I were in his situation, and my wife would have a conniption if I were banned from watching one of her talks.
Again, I can't think of a single legitimate reason not to have let his wife go to his talk, and that simple act would have bought a lot of goodwill. The fact that no one was able to make that simple judgement call is a sign of terrible organization.
I wouldn't have been nearly so polite if I were in his situation, and my wife would have a conniption if I were banned from watching one of her talks.
Again, I can't think of a single legitimate reason not to have let his wife go to his talk, and that simple act would have bought a lot of goodwill. The fact that no one was able to make that simple judgement call is a sign of terrible organization.
I imagine they take a hardline because otherwise it creates a precedent. "Can this guy come in and take photos? It's my boyfriend/brother/BFF/etc." Becomes a potential loophole.
Very unlikely to be exploited, but I imagine that's what they're thinking. If they are thinking...
Very unlikely to be exploited, but I imagine that's what they're thinking. If they are thinking...
Of course it creates a precedent. The question is whether such a precedent is OK. There are other examples here where that precedent happened and created a lot of good will consequently.
"We don't want to use common sense, we just want to have rules that anyone can blindly enforce."
The problem with leaving things to common sense is that different people's common sense will lead to different decisions in many situations - it can lead to questionable forms of selective enforcement.
"Other speakers' wives were allowed to attend their talks, but my homosexual life parter was escored out by security!"
"I paid $$$ to attend but this speaker brought 5 friends who got in for free!"
If you depend on common sense, you either have to make sure to hire only people who don't misjudge, ever, or have to deal with embarrassing mistakes.
"Other speakers' wives were allowed to attend their talks, but my homosexual life parter was escored out by security!"
"I paid $$$ to attend but this speaker brought 5 friends who got in for free!"
If you depend on common sense, you either have to make sure to hire only people who don't misjudge, ever, or have to deal with embarrassing mistakes.
Misjudgements will happen no matter what, and it's not like it's an either-or proposition. It's perfectly possible to have a set of guidelines that can be used together with common sense, but no matter what people should have the authority to _fix the problem_. The root problem in this instance wasn't using common sense to allow someone into the conference, it was a complete failure to find a satisfactory solution to the problem. Had the wife been told to wait in the meeting room, that would suck but would probably not have ended up causing a shitstorm.
And they are avoiding "embarrassing mistakes" with rigid enforcement how?
> it can lead to questionable forms of selective enforcement.
The alternative tends to lead to questionable enforcement, and it's debatable which is better.
The alternative tends to lead to questionable enforcement, and it's debatable which is better.
Absolutely - I just wanted to point out that "common sense" is not a magic bullet and rigid rules are often installed for good reasons.
Companies like Microsoft know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
You can't qualify customer support and kindness at a company like Microsoft - although I'm sure they have some USER EXPERIENCE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ENGAGEMENT MATRIX with a catchy turn of MBA phrase somewhere.
You can't qualify customer support and kindness at a company like Microsoft - although I'm sure they have some USER EXPERIENCE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ENGAGEMENT MATRIX with a catchy turn of MBA phrase somewhere.
New Orleans right now has the highest murder rate in the US. It is not only a very dangerous city, it is in fact currently the most dangerous city in the entire country.
http://www.npr.org/2012/07/05/155986277/new-orleans-struggle...
Leaving someone out in a strange foreign city of this nature to just deal with it is absurd.
http://www.npr.org/2012/07/05/155986277/new-orleans-struggle...
Leaving someone out in a strange foreign city of this nature to just deal with it is absurd.
I've never seen a major conference center that didn't have a place to drink coffee and read for 2 hours without being killed. There are even large, open pre-registration areas in the center for folks to chill for exactly this sort of reason.
That said, it sounds like he and his wife were treated horribly.
That said, it sounds like he and his wife were treated horribly.
"I've never seen a major conference center that didn't have a place to drink coffee and read for 2 hours without being killed. "
Both the perfectness and absurdity of this sentence is awesome.
New Orleans may be bad, but it isn't _that_ bad, especially an area that MS (or any big firm) chooses for a company sponsored gathering. If MS was bright had any respect for their speakers they would have dynamically made room available for this speaker's wife in some area inside the conference center. They are idiots for not bending rules doing it. But to also think they shoved her out a door and steel barred the entrance and left her there by herself in the middle of Voodoo Shantytown New Orleans where the creole shamans and werewolves circled her is just as crazy.
I get where the author is coming from and totally understand his stance, but I honestly do not believe that MS intentionally put his (non-invited?) wife in harms way. From his description MS treated him awfully and I hope they realize this and attempt to correct it in the future and see where being human in some instances is indirectly worth more than the price of admission to TechEd, but lets be honest - they didn't make his wife walk the plank to circling sharks.
Both the perfectness and absurdity of this sentence is awesome.
New Orleans may be bad, but it isn't _that_ bad, especially an area that MS (or any big firm) chooses for a company sponsored gathering. If MS was bright had any respect for their speakers they would have dynamically made room available for this speaker's wife in some area inside the conference center. They are idiots for not bending rules doing it. But to also think they shoved her out a door and steel barred the entrance and left her there by herself in the middle of Voodoo Shantytown New Orleans where the creole shamans and werewolves circled her is just as crazy.
I get where the author is coming from and totally understand his stance, but I honestly do not believe that MS intentionally put his (non-invited?) wife in harms way. From his description MS treated him awfully and I hope they realize this and attempt to correct it in the future and see where being human in some instances is indirectly worth more than the price of admission to TechEd, but lets be honest - they didn't make his wife walk the plank to circling sharks.
I've never seen a major conference center that didn't
have a place to drink coffee and read for 2 hours without
being killed.
I've been to this conference center. It's in a very decent, touristy part of town with plenty of hotels, cafes, and restaurants. In fact there are two hotels right across the street, one of which has a Starbucks in the lobby.
The real issue here was conference organizers being officious and failing to use common sense, which the OP had a legitimate reason to be annoyed about given he was a speaker and apparently went to some trouble and expense. No need to be over the top, it was bad enough without the hyperbole.
The real issue here was conference organizers being officious and failing to use common sense, which the OP had a legitimate reason to be annoyed about given he was a speaker and apparently went to some trouble and expense. No need to be over the top, it was bad enough without the hyperbole.
This is hyperbolic nonsense. A high murder rate across the city as a whole does not imply that you are in physical danger standing outside a conference center in the middle of the day. That's simply not how murder works.
She's not being left... an adult should easily be able to either get a cab, or find somewhere safe nearby, or have some plan -- I'm sure she had a hotel room, she could get back to that the same way she got to the conference center in the first place. I am not saying the whole situation wasn't ridiculous, but I feel like people here are acting like this woman is a helpless child.
I got dropped in Paris one day and my friend never showed up, I didn't have a place to go and I didn't know the area or speak French, but I managed to find a guest house and a grocery store and I lived for a few days -- any adult can do the same, this is not rocket science and being a woman doesn't make this more difficult.
I got dropped in Paris one day and my friend never showed up, I didn't have a place to go and I didn't know the area or speak French, but I managed to find a guest house and a grocery store and I lived for a few days -- any adult can do the same, this is not rocket science and being a woman doesn't make this more difficult.
It's not about her capabilities. If you mistreat my spouse, you can expect a strong negative reaction from me.
Im sure it was a frustrating experience but they already worked around your schedule and got a ticket (although only one way) for your wife. If you emailed the conference or talked to someone a head of time and they said it would be ok to bring her in then you deserve to be mad. If you just showed up with her, I'm not sure why you expected her to just enter with no problems.
> I'm not sure why you expected her to just enter with no problems.
Because it's the right thing to do? And because they knew she was coming, and had bought here a ticket?
Sorry, they were wrong. Simple as that.
Because it's the right thing to do? And because they knew she was coming, and had bought here a ticket?
Sorry, they were wrong. Simple as that.
Obviously they didn't expect her to come since he didn't communicate his intentions ahead of time. I've worked security at these kind of events before. You say no to any special kind of request and if the guest insist you refer to a manager if they are available. If they aren't you go back to no. If you want a special request you communicate this ahead of time and definitely not 30 minutes before you have to be inside. Everyone has a story for why they should be allowed to bend the rules.
Seeing as we were that strict when the tickets were in the range of $30-$200 I personally think it was a failure of the initial security guards to even let her in the building to begin with.
Seeing as we were that strict when the tickets were in the range of $30-$200 I personally think it was a failure of the initial security guards to even let her in the building to begin with.
I'm not suggesting the security was at fault. However, I'm pretty damn sure if security knows that someone needs to be there for the show to go on, and they are saying they need person X to attend as well, the security isn't going to make this decision. They are going to get someone who can make this decision. And that would be Microsoft or some representative with the power to make the decision, and those are the people at fault.
Regardless…
> Obviously they didn't expect her to come since he didn't communicate his intentions ahead of time.
That doesn't matter one damn bit.
> You say no to any special kind of request and if the guest insist
Except it wasn't a guest making this request. It was, effectively, the talent. So I'm pretty sure security doesn't make the call when the talent makes a request.
Regardless…
> Obviously they didn't expect her to come since he didn't communicate his intentions ahead of time.
That doesn't matter one damn bit.
> You say no to any special kind of request and if the guest insist
Except it wasn't a guest making this request. It was, effectively, the talent. So I'm pretty sure security doesn't make the call when the talent makes a request.
It's obvious you're not a married man ;o)
I am, and my wife isn't helpless. If I am on a work trip, she makes preparations to entertain herself while I am busy. Being married doesn't mean that your spouse is attached at the hip or helpless in your absence, it's pretty wild that people in this thread seem to feel that this person's wife is incapable of autonomy. It's crazy that MS escorted her out, it's crazy that it came to that in the first place, it's even more crazy that he didn't walk out with her and sort things out and that people feel like an adult female is somehow incapable of spending a few hours without their husband, it's kind of sexist.
From the article "What man would just leave his wife in a foreign country stranded outside a conference hall for almost two hours without even letting her know what was going on."
How is that not kicking her to the curb?
How is that not kicking her to the curb?
That he couldn't say "Well, this isn't working out, let's meet in 2 hours at X." before she was escorted out seems very implausible to me.
I've spoken at plenty of conferences, and brought my wife along, and have had my share of complications, and my wife has been able to "wing it," as I expect any adult should be able to do.
I'm not saying it's completely absurd that she should have to wing it, but I just don't feel like this is the substance of the issue being presented. His wife is not a helpless child with no money, information or ability to move freely, so I am just not willing to accept that being escorted out (which was stupid in the first place) is tantamount to being abandoned.
I've spoken at plenty of conferences, and brought my wife along, and have had my share of complications, and my wife has been able to "wing it," as I expect any adult should be able to do.
I'm not saying it's completely absurd that she should have to wing it, but I just don't feel like this is the substance of the issue being presented. His wife is not a helpless child with no money, information or ability to move freely, so I am just not willing to accept that being escorted out (which was stupid in the first place) is tantamount to being abandoned.
> That he couldn't say "Well, this isn't working out, let's meet in 2 hours at X." before she was escorted out seems very implausible to me.
The article clearly explains this:
> Thinking its a small misunderstanding (security is almost always contracted through the venue not the conference) I went to room 238 to try to figure things out. After explaining the situation going on to three staff members I was given the “opportunity” to buy a ticket (full conference on the last day) for her. They then handed me a shirt and said “you need to head over to your talk”
Basically, the author believed that he could just work something out, so at the time that his wife left, he did not make plans to meet up anywhere, and she did not know what was happening. Furthermore, the conference organizers then said that he needed to go speak immediately, which would have prevented him from letting her know what was going on.
I'm presenting at two conferences in the next week, and my fiancee is luckily able to attend one of them. Not having a seat for her is one thing, but having security bring her out of the building and giving me the "opportunity" to buy a full-price ticket is absurd.
The article clearly explains this:
> Thinking its a small misunderstanding (security is almost always contracted through the venue not the conference) I went to room 238 to try to figure things out. After explaining the situation going on to three staff members I was given the “opportunity” to buy a ticket (full conference on the last day) for her. They then handed me a shirt and said “you need to head over to your talk”
Basically, the author believed that he could just work something out, so at the time that his wife left, he did not make plans to meet up anywhere, and she did not know what was happening. Furthermore, the conference organizers then said that he needed to go speak immediately, which would have prevented him from letting her know what was going on.
I'm presenting at two conferences in the next week, and my fiancee is luckily able to attend one of them. Not having a seat for her is one thing, but having security bring her out of the building and giving me the "opportunity" to buy a full-price ticket is absurd.
I'm a male adult and regard myself as being quite independent, if I want to. If my significant other just after arriving in a foreign country where I planned to follow her would leave me alone in such an unexpected way without a clear plan how to meet and a clear message of what is going on, I wouldn't like that very much. Not at all. Even though I'd not be helpless in such a situation, it is just absolutely disrespectful.
And, which is a severe thing, it would also show that me that the other person allows others to treat him that way, something I'd also think I'd not accept at all for myself.
And, which is a severe thing, it would also show that me that the other person allows others to treat him that way, something I'd also think I'd not accept at all for myself.
Then surely the guy insists on being able to speak with his wife to arrange a time/meeting place?
He did the more self-respecting thing: leave these bureaucratic idiots to their stupid conference to be with his partner.
Disrespected conference attendees, right?
If I have to choose between disrespecting my wife and conference attendees, I'm sorry about the attendees.
Do they pay their speakers?
Do they pay their speakers?
What does payment have to do with it? A little common sense & a little respect for people is not nullified just because money has paid hands.
This wasn't a choice between keeping his wife alive and speaking at a conference, or annulling a marriage! His wife knew he'd be speaking at a conference. She's an adult and is surely able to read a newspaper at a coffee shop, find an art gallery or whatever else for a couple of hours.
Non-speaker could've insisted on speaking to his wife to arrange a time to meet afterwards, fulfilled his presentation/speech, then written a complaint about lack of flexibility later.
Non-speaker could've insisted on speaking to his wife to arrange a time to meet afterwards, fulfilled his presentation/speech, then written a complaint about lack of flexibility later.
The conference owes the conference attendees an apology for putting their speaker in the position of having to choose his wife or the attendees.
For that matter, they also owe the speaker and his wife an apology. Of course, as you could only expect from Microsoft, this has not happened.
For that matter, they also owe the speaker and his wife an apology. Of course, as you could only expect from Microsoft, this has not happened.
If I am invited to a conference and even if I tweak the flight arrangement so they pay for my wife's ticket to suit my person plans, I don't expect that my wife will be allowed inside for free.
Sounded like a pretty awkward situation as it was handled (shouldn't have been led on, and should've been encouraged to speak with his wife to arrange a meeting time later), but the non-speaker seemed a little precious to me.
Sounded like a pretty awkward situation as it was handled (shouldn't have been led on, and should've been encouraged to speak with his wife to arrange a meeting time later), but the non-speaker seemed a little precious to me.
Many things could go wrong, I am not saying it did, or would, but could. Perhaps it was too crowded, perhaps she was really tired, perhaps she is not confident with her english, perhaps she was not feeling well otherwise. Also, US cities are quite strange compared to european cities, they are not exactly pedestrian friendly. Check out the front of the venue: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=morial+convention+center+new+...
All in all, cut him some slack, he as a very valid point. They could have solved this easily, yet they chose to treat him like he doesn't matter.
All in all, cut him some slack, he as a very valid point. They could have solved this easily, yet they chose to treat him like he doesn't matter.
I agree, all the points are valid, I'm just pointing out that the comments here which are making an emphatic point about his wife being thrown to the curb are not compelling unless his wife is disabled or unable to communicate. Everything about the situation is all kinds of wrong, and singling out this one detail is a huge distraction to the real issue -- that Microsoft dropped the ball and treated a valued contributor like shit.
singling out this one detail is a huge distraction to the real issue
That's because some guy is kind of egging on Internet commenters, saying, "oh, she should just be an adult."
That's because some guy is kind of egging on Internet commenters, saying, "oh, she should just be an adult."
It felt like it was the other way around when this started.
It "started" in the text of the post itself, since the author, the person actually affected here, didn't much like his wife being kicked out. So it was straight-up threadshitting to call it no-big-deal.
There's nowhere in this thread where I said it ("it" being that his wife was escorted out) was no big deal. What I've said is that focusing on this particular detail and equating it to abandoning his wife in a dangerous, threatening place, which is what's been done here (note the repeated citing of crime statistics), distracts from the real issue, Microsoft mishandling their guests.
I agree that it's not exactly abandonment to all, but from the OPs perspective, who knows his wife best, it may have been as such. Not everyone takes to new and foreign places as well. I sincerely salute your ability to, but I get the impression that OP knew that if he'd left his wife to just take care of herself, he'd be in the doghouse later.
I'd know. I'm an expat, and while both my wife and I were eager to come to this assignment, we're not the same when it comes to unfamiliar surroundings. If it'd been me? Sure, I'll be at the nearest espresso bar I can find. Her? I would have done the same thing as OP.
This is all anecdotal, I know. But my point being, its wrong to assume that everyone is capable of just seamlessly taking care of things when you're newly arrived in a foreign country. I'd agree that its frustrating when someone can't, or just feels too nervous or intimidated, but that's something we accept and work around when we select the partners we do. OP was right in choosing his partner first. I'd have done the same.
I'd know. I'm an expat, and while both my wife and I were eager to come to this assignment, we're not the same when it comes to unfamiliar surroundings. If it'd been me? Sure, I'll be at the nearest espresso bar I can find. Her? I would have done the same thing as OP.
This is all anecdotal, I know. But my point being, its wrong to assume that everyone is capable of just seamlessly taking care of things when you're newly arrived in a foreign country. I'd agree that its frustrating when someone can't, or just feels too nervous or intimidated, but that's something we accept and work around when we select the partners we do. OP was right in choosing his partner first. I'd have done the same.
If this is your day job, yes, you should expect and anticipate these things. When you're presenting at a conference in a foreign country, all bets are off. I think how he reacted was reasonable given the evidence presented.
Picture having been left outside while your SO goes to figure out what's going on. She tells you she'll be right back.
Two hours later, she comes back. "Sorry, I had to give my talk. They didn't give me a choice. I hope you didn't get too bored standing out here waiting for me."
Personally, I applaud the author for realizing that there was, in fact, a choice - and then choosing it.
Two hours later, she comes back. "Sorry, I had to give my talk. They didn't give me a choice. I hope you didn't get too bored standing out here waiting for me."
Personally, I applaud the author for realizing that there was, in fact, a choice - and then choosing it.
No she was actually kicked to the curb, when she was physically escorted from the building by security. That right there is unacceptable behaviour. No one gives a shit about your precious bureaucracy and petty little power plays. Accommodate the people you've invited to your conference!
> While it would have been completely reasonable and courteous of MS to accommodate the speaker's wife, it's kind of wild to equate not letting her in to kicking her to the curb/abandoning her.
It is if they had told her they would let her in and then when they got him separated from her, they lead her out to the street. How is that not kicking her to the curb?
It is if they had told her they would let her in and then when they got him separated from her, they lead her out to the street. How is that not kicking her to the curb?
The problem isn't that it's dangerous or physically harmful, the problem is that it's rude and disrespectful.
This is sad because this is the opposite of my pre-Microsoft TechEd experience.
When I was in school, I got asked to do a demo for a Senior VP's keynote at TechEd to demo how a student would use Visual Studio. My parents happened to be in the vicinity and I was chatting with them outside the conference venue when a Microsoft employee walked by and asked who they were. When I told him, he asked me to get them inside so they could watch my talk in the big keynote hall, no passes required. That's the only time my dad has ever seen speak me in public and was a very special moment - it probably influenced how I perceived Microsoft and it's employees at a young age.
This particular case smacks of no one with any such decision making authority (basically a full time employee at Microsoft) present there who could help.
When I was in school, I got asked to do a demo for a Senior VP's keynote at TechEd to demo how a student would use Visual Studio. My parents happened to be in the vicinity and I was chatting with them outside the conference venue when a Microsoft employee walked by and asked who they were. When I told him, he asked me to get them inside so they could watch my talk in the big keynote hall, no passes required. That's the only time my dad has ever seen speak me in public and was a very special moment - it probably influenced how I perceived Microsoft and it's employees at a young age.
This particular case smacks of no one with any such decision making authority (basically a full time employee at Microsoft) present there who could help.
> This particular case smacks of no one with any such decision making authority (basically a full time employee at Microsoft) present there who could help.
Seriously, this should have never happened.
Seriously, this should have never happened.
What I appreciate about the OP is that he has plenty of reason to get mad, but he also recognizable the failure as a result of systematic flaws: the lack of point people and support staff, for instance. I hope I can show as much reasonibility as the OP if I ever get caught in a shitty bureaucratic mix.
He's definitely a better man than I. Surely there is someone(s) responsible for their UX and I think it's too lenient to say "them's the breaks". Unfortunately there's apparently nothing he can do about it as evidenced by their non-response and even threat. No point in getting worked up over things you can't control.
As someone who as exhibited at TechEd before, it's a poorly run event contracted out to the lowest bidder... just like he said.
It's the Microsoft way, their events are a reflection of how Microsoft truly is.
It's the Microsoft way, their events are a reflection of how Microsoft truly is.
I worked for a company that had a contract with Microsoft and I must say our travel and accommodation was handled well and they didn't cheap out. One piece of anecdotal evidence to throw out there.
In my experience, it all depends on who's picking up the tab. I assume you were hired as a consultant for a project. In that case, their client was paying, so there wasn't a reason to be cheap.
(And, of course, Microsoft is a huge organization; even if some policies are standardized, the way they are implemented can still vary wildly.)
(And, of course, Microsoft is a huge organization; even if some policies are standardized, the way they are implemented can still vary wildly.)
This sucks. However it's never been my experience, and I've brought my wife to a half-dozen techeds on three continents. Sounds like systematic misunderstandings that added up into one big mess.
(I've ignored the dress code for 15 years, FWIW)
(I've ignored the dress code for 15 years, FWIW)
Then again, you're MSFT employee.
And well known. Nobody wants the boss to find out: "uh, we alienated Hanselman".
He's talking about 15 years, but has been a MSFT employee for 6 years or so - http://www.hanselman.com/blog/BlueBadge.aspx
Right.. so his experience is either out of date, or as an MSFT employee.
No, the little red shirt vendor kids don't know me from anyone. I'm just saying there's multiple sides to every story and perhaps there's more to this one. I wasn't there.
My point is that I've never had a problem like this at any conference anywhere. Being pleasant and explaining one's self has always worked well for me when traveling with relatives to these conferences.
My point is that I've never had a problem like this at any conference anywhere. Being pleasant and explaining one's self has always worked well for me when traveling with relatives to these conferences.
> This sucks. However it's never been my experience,
This just in - Scott Hanselman treated better than other presenters at TechEd. Film at 11.
This just in - Scott Hanselman treated better than other presenters at TechEd. Film at 11.
Wow this is horrible. I hope Microsoft does something to rectify this.
I had the complete opposite experience speaking at One More Thing in Australia. The organisers completely took care of my wife and infant son, were constantly on-hand to provide any assistance. They went beyond what I expected.
I had the complete opposite experience speaking at One More Thing in Australia. The organisers completely took care of my wife and infant son, were constantly on-hand to provide any assistance. They went beyond what I expected.
Repeat after me:
Microsoft 201X is IBM 199X
It sounds like they treated you poorly, and I'm naturally inclined to side with people who would abandon the exposure that a set of TechEd talks would bring in favor of not ignoring his wife, but...
...did you make your wife's inclusion part of the contract? To the folks you dealt with on site, it may have seemed that you were springing something unexpected on them at the last second. "Hey, my wife gets in free to take pictures or I walk."
Yes, it should have been trivial for them to allow that, but is it possible you came off as a bully? I wouldn't have made the same decision as they did, but I can imagine a scenario when bringing up your wife in the 11th hour would have gotten my ire up a little.
...did you make your wife's inclusion part of the contract? To the folks you dealt with on site, it may have seemed that you were springing something unexpected on them at the last second. "Hey, my wife gets in free to take pictures or I walk."
Yes, it should have been trivial for them to allow that, but is it possible you came off as a bully? I wouldn't have made the same decision as they did, but I can imagine a scenario when bringing up your wife in the 11th hour would have gotten my ire up a little.
I've run into some bad situations due to lowest bidder staff at conferences as well. One travel agency agreed to a bulk rate, then started charging everyone full price after the first 5 or so people. Meanwhile there were plane and visa deadlines and the like and they did this while they had visas in hand, preventing people from going elsewhere for travel and still making the trip.
Off topic, but I do love his web site.
Yeah, lots of good .Net stuff
He might have convinced me to port to Mono.
He might have convinced me to port to Mono.
I don't think they expected him to bring guests to a tech conference. What if he brought his kids as well? Grandma? Free $2000 tickets for all? Remember that the hired guns at these events are not paid to think, just follow orders. He should have got special clearance weeks in advance for free entrance for his family - that's the uncomfortable truth.
He will probably live to regret this as a speaking gig at TechEd as a non-MS employee is not to be sniffed at and now he has shunned the Borg - whom he must be pretty invested in skills wise to be invited in the first place. His wife could have gone and done some sightseeing while he works for a few hours.
He will probably live to regret this as a speaking gig at TechEd as a non-MS employee is not to be sniffed at and now he has shunned the Borg - whom he must be pretty invested in skills wise to be invited in the first place. His wife could have gone and done some sightseeing while he works for a few hours.
I think the core issue here is more about the treatment than the expectations. If they had handled the situation differently, it would not have been an issue. The problem was there was no consideration for his wife in the slightest. It definitely feels like a commoditised arrangement rather than a human interaction.
I've spoken at lots of conferences, brought friends to many of my talks, and would do exactly what he did in the same circumstance.
As a counter example, I have been to a number of conferences where the speakers/presenters/panelists and volunteers were expected to pay the full registration fee, so as you can imagine, friends/family and +1's wouldn't get special treatment.
While some events are pretty laid back, it looks like the registration for this event cost ~$2000, which is a pretty penny. My gut instinct would be to check with the event organizers first before trying to bring a +1, but I think the OP assumed that because he was able to negotiate with the travel coordinators for two one way tickets, one for his wife (instead of one round trip ticket), he probably assumed that this was implicit consent for his wife to tag along at the conference. Seems like a big mis-understanding that was confounded by poor treatment from security staff (and before we start ragging on the security staff, it is worth mentioning that event security tends to be a thankless, miserable job. Crappy wages and hours, and depending on the event, you spend most of your time dealing with people who treat you like shit.)
While some events are pretty laid back, it looks like the registration for this event cost ~$2000, which is a pretty penny. My gut instinct would be to check with the event organizers first before trying to bring a +1, but I think the OP assumed that because he was able to negotiate with the travel coordinators for two one way tickets, one for his wife (instead of one round trip ticket), he probably assumed that this was implicit consent for his wife to tag along at the conference. Seems like a big mis-understanding that was confounded by poor treatment from security staff (and before we start ragging on the security staff, it is worth mentioning that event security tends to be a thankless, miserable job. Crappy wages and hours, and depending on the event, you spend most of your time dealing with people who treat you like shit.)
> As a counter example, I have been to a number of conferences where the speakers/presenters/panelists and volunteers were expected to pay the full registration fee,
At TechEd, Microsoft picks you, guides your session abstract wording, reviews and changes your slides, specifies your clothing, tells you when to show up for booth duty at the Microsoft booth, and pays you for it. You're basically a community mouthpiece for Microsoft. This is very much a vendor event.
At TechEd, Microsoft picks you, guides your session abstract wording, reviews and changes your slides, specifies your clothing, tells you when to show up for booth duty at the Microsoft booth, and pays you for it. You're basically a community mouthpiece for Microsoft. This is very much a vendor event.
Who would speak at an event that charged speakers to do so?
These events may charge $2000 a head, but it doesn't cost them $2000, or even $5, to let a +1 watch your talk.
These events may charge $2000 a head, but it doesn't cost them $2000, or even $5, to let a +1 watch your talk.
Everybody who has ever spoken at PyCon for one (and volunteers as well): http://jessenoller.com/blog/2011/05/25/pycon-everybody-pays
It looks like the OP is an established consultant/teacher, so he probably only goes to conferences that invite him to speak (and my guess is, from what I have heard about you tptacek, that you are in the same boat), so he may be unfamiliar with the practice. But for us peons, with little to no name recognition, conference papers and talks can be a big resume booster, so it's not out of the question to pay-to-speak (you still have to go through the proposal process though). In my old industry, this was standard practice, and because almost everyone had their conference registration and travel paid for by their employer, it wasn't a huge deal.
It looks like the OP is an established consultant/teacher, so he probably only goes to conferences that invite him to speak (and my guess is, from what I have heard about you tptacek, that you are in the same boat), so he may be unfamiliar with the practice. But for us peons, with little to no name recognition, conference papers and talks can be a big resume booster, so it's not out of the question to pay-to-speak (you still have to go through the proposal process though). In my old industry, this was standard practice, and because almost everyone had their conference registration and travel paid for by their employer, it wasn't a huge deal.
I think I've had to pay to talk at any association for computing machinery, association for computing in the humanities, american library association, society of american archivists, society of california archivists, and collation for networked information meeting I've given a talk at. Didn't used to have to pay to talk at digital library federation meetings; but that was when your organization had to pay a 5 figure membership to send folks. I've even had to pay to talk at the university of california computing services conference. I din't have to pay to talk at the library of congress or the national archives. Those are pretty much the only places I've given a speech (besides in high school when I was on the speech team).
At many acedemic conferences, it might be only speakers showing up. Anyways, increasing the number of papers you accept is a good way to boost attendance.
[deleted]
SIGGRAPH and USENIX are two high-profile conferences where almost everyone attending pays, whether speaking or not. Both do make exceptions for a handful of invited keynotes.
The same with IEEE: conferences are intended to make money for the IEEE and for the local organization hosting the conference.
But would you have tried to show up more than 30 minutes ahead of your speaking slot if you were bringing a wife who didn't speak English who didn't have a conference preregistration?
Lest anyone think I'm being judgmental I personally might have shown up about 0 minutes before I had to talk and behaved exactly like he did.
Lest anyone think I'm being judgmental I personally might have shown up about 0 minutes before I had to talk and behaved exactly like he did.
The scale of these conferences necessitates a strict badge rule. To get a badge, you need a registration. No badge = asked to leave. The security drones don't have the authority to issue badges on the spot and are programmed to kick out non-badge holders. Good for you that you would have cancelled 30 mins before the talk but it still would be a breach of contract most likely.
I took a +1 to an RSA talk without a problem. RSA is gigantic (it eats Moscone) and badge-controlled. I just said "I need this person here in order to do the talk".
The typical solution is to assign a person with the authority to let +1 guests in to the registration desk or at least make sure that such a person can be contacted when needed. This is fairly common in my experience regardless of the scale of the event so I'm not sure why you're trying to make it look like this was somehow unreasonable.
Even if that's true and this was an unexpected situation, they handled it in the most inhumane and callous way possible.
> He will probably live to regret this....
I hope nothing in life makes you regret more than canceling after security escorts your significant other outside.
As to the admission money, we pay the $ because we gain something. Expecting a speaker not to bring someone is just plain foolish.
I hope nothing in life makes you regret more than canceling after security escorts your significant other outside.
As to the admission money, we pay the $ because we gain something. Expecting a speaker not to bring someone is just plain foolish.
Yea, I must say it's a bit weird to assume you can bring your wife to an event like this, with such absolute certainty that you feel it would be entirely incomprehensible for her if you did not manage to get her in but instead had to give your talk...
They paid for his wife's one-way plane ticket to the event, so it probably shouldn't have been a total shock. Regardless, that's just not a nice way to treat people.
Sorry, but I still think a plane ticket and a conference pass are two different things...
Maybe this is a bit of a culture clash (I'm Swedish) but my initial reaction is: This has an almost sexist undertone to it (what kind of a man would treat a woman like that - she's absolutely helpless and couldn't even comprehend why I was suddenly gone) and it feels rather unprofessional.
The only people who where treated really badly here as I see it where the (hundreds?) of people who payed for their passes, stood in line to collect them and expected to hear a talk that never came.
Sure you can be annoyed somebody treated your wife poorly, but the appropriate response is an email to the organizers after the event or similar. That's my 5 cents at least.
Maybe this is a bit of a culture clash (I'm Swedish) but my initial reaction is: This has an almost sexist undertone to it (what kind of a man would treat a woman like that - she's absolutely helpless and couldn't even comprehend why I was suddenly gone) and it feels rather unprofessional.
The only people who where treated really badly here as I see it where the (hundreds?) of people who payed for their passes, stood in line to collect them and expected to hear a talk that never came.
Sure you can be annoyed somebody treated your wife poorly, but the appropriate response is an email to the organizers after the event or similar. That's my 5 cents at least.
I'd say it goes deeper than that, touching on the meaning of marriage. The speaker was put in the position where he had to choose between his spouse and a talk. He chose his wife, in accordance with his marriage vows. I can't see that it is sexist, as the logic doesn't change if the gender of any party is changed.
> The speaker was put in the position where he had to choose between his spouse and a talk.
My simple objection is that he could have had booth.
My simple objection is that he could have had booth.
If you organise a conference, then arrange flights and accommodations for +1s be they independent adults, dependents of any kind, family dog, company director, servant or journalist, you better have options for that +1 that include allowing them access to the venue for the period that your invited speaker is expected to be there.
Something as simple as am "Invited Guest" pass, to indicate that this person is allowed to the coffee shop, merchandise store and toilets unaccompanied, is the least you can do. It doesn't matter who invited them, just give them the Amulet of Warding From Security Drones. Job done.
Then when arranging insurance for the event, make sure you account for expected people +30% to allow for "Invited Guests" brought along by the organisers, stage hands, support technicians, attendees and the CEO of the company running the show who decided on the spur of the moment to drag a retinue of golf friends around the event to show off.
It is not rocket surgery!
Something as simple as am "Invited Guest" pass, to indicate that this person is allowed to the coffee shop, merchandise store and toilets unaccompanied, is the least you can do. It doesn't matter who invited them, just give them the Amulet of Warding From Security Drones. Job done.
Then when arranging insurance for the event, make sure you account for expected people +30% to allow for "Invited Guests" brought along by the organisers, stage hands, support technicians, attendees and the CEO of the company running the show who decided on the spur of the moment to drag a retinue of golf friends around the event to show off.
It is not rocket surgery!
I disagree. I've been much more frequently the "+1" to my wife as she speaks to audiences, and I've been universally welcomed and made comfortable while she does her thing. If security ever escorted me out of the venue just for being there, I'd be willing to bet that you'd be able to hear her chewing the coordinator a new butt from the next county over.
If it were the other way around, with me being left outside, I'd be beside myself.
As I understood the sequence of events, the staff first separated the speaker from his wife. Then they told him that they could not accommodate her in the speakers' lounge, and that she'd have to wait outside the facility.
So from her perspective, there were some complications to be ironed out, and we'll get it taken care of. And then, suddenly, the door is slamming behind her as she's standing on the street, with no idea of what's happening to her spouse the speaker. Should she stand here and wait for him to come get her? How will we meet up after the event, if he doesn't come out?
The speaker, properly empathizing with his spouse over the way she must feel, chooses his commitment to her.
It's not a question of whether the person kicked out is likely to be murdered. It's a question of being made to feel powerless, with no clear course of action. Those are feelings that any human is likely to have, regardless of their gender.
As I understood the sequence of events, the staff first separated the speaker from his wife. Then they told him that they could not accommodate her in the speakers' lounge, and that she'd have to wait outside the facility.
So from her perspective, there were some complications to be ironed out, and we'll get it taken care of. And then, suddenly, the door is slamming behind her as she's standing on the street, with no idea of what's happening to her spouse the speaker. Should she stand here and wait for him to come get her? How will we meet up after the event, if he doesn't come out?
The speaker, properly empathizing with his spouse over the way she must feel, chooses his commitment to her.
It's not a question of whether the person kicked out is likely to be murdered. It's a question of being made to feel powerless, with no clear course of action. Those are feelings that any human is likely to have, regardless of their gender.
While I can understand his concern about not being able to let her know, they are in America not some country in civil war. She should have been able to watch him but I am sure she could manage to find a Starbucks by herself.
> they are in America not some country in civil war
New Orleans currently has the highest murder rate in the US. It is the most dangerous place to be in the country, and it is more dangerous than many countries in civil war.
If his partner is trained in self defense and marksmanship, armed with a concealed carry, and willing, then it may be safe for her to wander about on her own. It is unlikely though they came with defensive arms since they just flew in from Bali.
New Orleans currently has the highest murder rate in the US. It is the most dangerous place to be in the country, and it is more dangerous than many countries in civil war.
If his partner is trained in self defense and marksmanship, armed with a concealed carry, and willing, then it may be safe for her to wander about on her own. It is unlikely though they came with defensive arms since they just flew in from Bali.
That is some high-quality pearl clutching. I feel safer in the Ninth Ward than at a TechEd.
Conversely, when in New Orleans several years back for Halloween (2010), I was ~1 block away from a Marine who was stabbed while defending his wife from being accosted in the French Quarter:
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2013/02/man_who_stabbed_...
You're a fool to go out alone after a certain hour in New Orleans, concealed carry or not.
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2013/02/man_who_stabbed_...
You're a fool to go out alone after a certain hour in New Orleans, concealed carry or not.
I can't tell if you're being histrionic or just trolling, judging by your karma and HN community's usual intolerance for humor I'm guessing it's the former.
It's not weird at all, and not only that, but you should expect your +1 to be seated for your talk, not shown to a speaker's lounge.
You didn't read the article, did you?
Him and his wife were traveling together. He didn't bring her with him to the conference; they changed their travel plans so that he would be able to speak at the conference.
Him and his wife were traveling together. He didn't bring her with him to the conference; they changed their travel plans so that he would be able to speak at the conference.
It's not like it costs them $2000 to give her a ticket. They don't have to spend any extra resources on her, she's not a foregone sale, and she's not displacing anyone who would have paid. It's a $0 ticket that they would have given to her.
> Free $2000 tickets for all?
You mean free $0 tickets. It doesn't cost them anything to have her in the speaker lounge. They paid for her plane ticket which actually cost them money, but they wouldn't let her wait for him?
You mean free $0 tickets. It doesn't cost them anything to have her in the speaker lounge. They paid for her plane ticket which actually cost them money, but they wouldn't let her wait for him?
Besides, she can get the content of the talk at home anyway, over beer.
He didn't ask for free tickets, just admission to his talk.
It's a common courtesy and necessary. You need to be able to take pictures on your own to safely be able to use those pictures in your own marketing or other material.
I've never spoken at a major conference, but the folks whom I've worked with who have at a corporate/organization always bring an assistant or friend to take pictures to memorialize the appearance. I've been the assistant role a couple of times early in my career -- 2/3 times I was given a "exhibitors hall" or "sponsored session pass" gratis.
It's a common courtesy and necessary. You need to be able to take pictures on your own to safely be able to use those pictures in your own marketing or other material.
I've never spoken at a major conference, but the folks whom I've worked with who have at a corporate/organization always bring an assistant or friend to take pictures to memorialize the appearance. I've been the assistant role a couple of times early in my career -- 2/3 times I was given a "exhibitors hall" or "sponsored session pass" gratis.
Agreed. I've spoken at quite a few conferences, including a couple of talks at OSCON. While I've been to disorganized conferences, I've never been to one that would have treated me so poorly.
At some point Microsoft has to trust their invited guests to behave like professionals. Believe me, if I ever decide to abuse Microsoft's hospitality as a guest speaker at one of their conferences, I will get a LOT more creative than merely inviting my kids and family members to sit in the audience.
I don't know exactly what I would do or say once I got behind the mic, but you'd probably read about it on here, if not on CNN.
I don't know exactly what I would do or say once I got behind the mic, but you'd probably read about it on here, if not on CNN.
Well clearly bringing in 'the fam' as opposed to ' the wife' would be whole other story.
Buy I would think a company such as Microsoft could figure out basic common courtesy for guests that they invited.
Buy I would think a company such as Microsoft could figure out basic common courtesy for guests that they invited.
I think this is definitely one of the more reasonable 'rants' I have seen.
I would be hella pissed if this happened to me too.
Thanks for the heads-up. After this, I wouldn't even go to a TechEd much less speak at one - I know that you need to be invited, and I am not being so presumptuous to assume that I would be, just saying that if I were....after hearing this story and MSFT's non-response, I wouldn't entertain it.
I would be hella pissed if this happened to me too.
Thanks for the heads-up. After this, I wouldn't even go to a TechEd much less speak at one - I know that you need to be invited, and I am not being so presumptuous to assume that I would be, just saying that if I were....after hearing this story and MSFT's non-response, I wouldn't entertain it.
Meh. While they sure could have been more accomodating, 30 minutes before a talk is not the right time bring up your deal breaking demands.
Indeed. Why didn't they bring up potential guests beforehand?
Oh, you think the onus is on him? Weird.
Oh, you think the onus is on him? Weird.
[deleted](1)
"My wife should not be thrown out of the venue" is hardly an unexpected and entitled demand, though. It falls more into the "not going to mention it because it's implied" category.
Totally agree. If you pause to think about it, for a conference as large and expectedly bureaucratic as this one, asking for a last-minute ticket for your wife is no different than asking for one for a colleague. It's something that should have been taken care of more than 30 minutes before the talk.
He didn't ask for a ticket. He asked for her to be allowed into his own talk for the hour while he was giving it. That's a pretty tame and reasonable request.
[deleted]
Developers! Developers! Developers!
Isn't releasing the detail about the color of pants allowed in breach of some NDA ;)
This conference doesn't seem to be about tech anymore. Glad people are spreading the word, so MS can control & fix the damage. Tech conferences should be cool, interesting, and educational, all regardless of what you wear.
I know a conference that refused to let a pregnant woman in.
OP acted correctly, actually he could have gone to his talk and explain briefly to the attendees why he was leaving.
Duh. Microsoft.
For the antithesis of this: webstock.org.nz
Famous for spending love and effort on speakers.
Too bad to hear of your experience. Having stopped MS development 15 years ago I don't miss the way that company treats developers.
So let me make sure I get this correct - you brought your wife to a conference that it costs nearly $2k to get tickets too and you expected your wife to be able to get in, sans purchasing this ticket. I think your expectations of what you bought are off. Would you expect to get your wife into a movie theater free? A music concert? Unless you worked out special arrangements well in advance how did this even evaluate to a workable situation in your head? Now you rant on HN to get some publicity from the easy to please anti-MS crowd.. can you please post up a "How Go changed my life" article next while we're trolling?
> Would you expect to get your wife into a movie theater free? A music concert?
If it's opening night for a movie I'm in and the studio invited me to attend, or I'm going to be on stage playing during the concert, you better believe I'd expect my wife to be allowed to attend with me. That doesn't mean she she get to watch other movies in other theaters, or get to watch the rest of a weekend-long music festival for free.
If it's opening night for a movie I'm in and the studio invited me to attend, or I'm going to be on stage playing during the concert, you better believe I'd expect my wife to be allowed to attend with me. That doesn't mean she she get to watch other movies in other theaters, or get to watch the rest of a weekend-long music festival for free.
He expected his wife to be able to stay and see the talk that he had been invited to give and had gone out of his way to go to.
You seriously think it's unreasonable to get a +1 to your own talk?
You seriously think it's unreasonable to get a +1 to your own talk?
I'd never speak at TechEd again, and I told Microsoft the same thing, same reasons. The event staff is overly demanding and inconsiderate of speaker time. They repeatedly dragged me into mandatory virtual and in-person meetings to cover inane details that should have been covered via email. They mandated the color of pants speakers wore. Just ridiculously micromanaged.