tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9169624808612493701.post699042163840339710..comments2009-06-13T14:09:31.666-07:00Kristin Henryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14507405856874441165noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9169624808612493701.post-91582551666252374602009-06-13T14:09:31.666-07:002009-06-13T14:09:31.666-07:00Like I said, I don&#39;t necessarily agree with my suggestions but merely threw out ideas for talking points. I think its more important to not mislead people - so ratings, or a proper description, or making previous sessions available for people to view - would assist with that. Really, I&#39;m not about censorship - but I do believe in making stuff &quot;as advertised&quot;staceymhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09082175986917545453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9169624808612493701.post-15638269504704221582009-06-13T13:43:27.821-07:002009-06-13T13:43:27.821-07:00Yeah, I really think this whole issue would not have occurred if only it was preceded with a clear statement of what kind of session it was going to be. <br /><br />Some say the content has no place in a professional conference--but, really, the organizers and audience can decide that. In fact, I don&#39;t think he was doing a technical session but it was a performance/comedy thing. (I didn&#39;t see it but did see some of it in Boston a week earlier.) <br /><br />But yeah, labeling would solve it I think.philliphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11619417842046356785noreply@blogger.com