Hacker News Reader

Comment by aviraldg | Hacker News Reader

I don't think some of the rules "scale" that well in India... like the 100-attendee limit.

Are you referring to the population of India? Doesn't that just mean there will be more TEDx events in India? The reason for the 100 attendee limit is obviously to start a conversation between the attendees and to save it from becoming a large and impersonal convention.

So how do you explain removing the limit[1] if your organiser has attended TED (needing a $6,000 ticket[2])?

1. http://www.ted.com/pages/tedx_faq#A13

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TED_(conference)#Controversies_...

I was going to make the same comment. The 100 attendee limit is very hard to do in a country where 1,000s would be willing to attend. Maybe, and this is really just back-of-napkin-math, if the limit was 0.00001 of the total population?

> The 100 attendee limit is very hard to do in a country where 1,000s would be willing to attend.

"Sorry, we've sold out."

Want to allow thousands to attend? Go for it. Just don't call it TEDx. If you want to call it TEDx, you follow the TEDx rules.

TEDx is supposed to be small, intimate events to help facilitate the exchange of ideas. It is NOT supposed to be some mass-sponsored event where businesses send their employees to pad their industrial "clout" or CVs that they 'attended TEDx New York'.

To call yourself a TEDx event, and thus garner the international attention to your speakers through TED online talks and other avenues, the local event has to adhere to certain criteria. Some of the events in India are violating far more than the 100 person 'rule', like pushing highly discredited science. 'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence' -- said evidence did not accompany the talks in question.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com