So you want to speak at a conference | Hacker News Reader

So you want to speak at a conference

katemats.com

39 pointsjcolman13 comments

Recently the "everyone must be a speaker" drum-roll is getting too loud. Does being a non-speaker at conferences and workshops reduce my technical ability? I think not.

The problem with insisting that "everyone must be a speaker" - all the shy-introverted-yet-technically-good-developers get the short end of the stick and you are left with spin doctors who can promote themselves very well. Sad.

I've never considered myself a confident speaker but last year I did 8 talks, some were in small meetup type events, others in larger conferences.

Most of the of other speakers I meet are just as introverted as me, get quite nervous about speaking, but with practice have got better and learn how to manage their stress and introvertness - I don't think the OP is any different to that.

Experience and positive feedback helps, with good preparation the more talks I give the better I think I get.

I know that I currently give a far better talk if I've got space around me (I want to be able to glance at my speaker notes if necessary, but find podiums really restrictive).

I also like to move around and come to the front of the stage not be shy and retire to the back corner (even if that's what I feel like doing sometimes).

I also have a routine before I go on stage - drink plenty of fluids, close my eyes, breath and just think about how I'm going to start, key points etc.

The other thing that always helps me is remembering the audience have come to learn from you they want you to succeed.

I don't think "everyone must be a speaker", for some of us it's just that it's an effective way of teaching and sharing knowledge despite our introverted nature.

(Other thing to remember is when you're onstage at a big conference, you can't see past the first few rows anyway)

> all the shy-introverted-yet-technically-good-developers get the short end of the stick and you are left with spin doctors who can promote themselves very well

Exactly, which is why more good technical speakers are needed: the guy who makes the best job at convincing why his idea is better than the one from the other guy is the one that will get his idea implemented.

And I'm not talking about people selling smoke: if I'm competing for one idea against another developer's proposal, and both seems reasonable enough, how will the boss know my idea is better if I keep it to myself? Even if I send him a paper explaining why my method is O(n log n), if my co-worker makes a 45 min presentation addressing my boss' concerns (which may not be only technical - "using this cloud provider it's reliable and will make us look as a forward-moving company" solves two of my boss' problems), he'll get the implementation.

When dealing with humans, emotions also play a role. Perhaps after the robot uprising we can solve our problems by forwarding benchmarks in CSV files, but until then it wouldn't hurt taking a course on two in how to get our ideas across our bosses' thick skulls.

Can somebody please explain to me what is the point of the overlay header in some websites (like OP's)? Do people really want to reduce the content's available screen real state because of the header? I really don't see the point of it and it's one of the main reasons I love readability. Do people really want the header present at all times while you are reading the page's content? It's not inconvenient to just go to the top of the page in case you need a link from there but maybe I missed the usability tests proving otherwise. This is a genuine question btw, so if anyone could inform me I would really appreciate it.

I think it works decently on desktop computers, but it's ridiculous on laptops with 768 pixels vertically. This site measures as 555 px, which really sucks.

NoScript blocks most of them (including this site) which helps.

NoScript blocks them by default or do you need to apply some rule?

By default you have to whitelist sites, and most of the fixed bars require Javascript - so yeah.

IME, at industrial conferences, your pitches get accepted if you are friends with the organizers, or if someone who is friends with the organizers vouches for you to the organizers or co-presents with you. That's about it.

You can also organize your own conference. I had the same issue of never been accepted as speaker because I was not enough connected or too new in the ecosystem, I did my own conferences worldwide and it works pretty well now. For the fun fact, I'm now sometimes invited without applying for keynotes.

1) To that speaking slots are allocated socially, that (correctly) suggests that one should network if one wants to get more speaking gigs.

2) It is wildly not the case that all speaking gigs begin with having an in with the organizers, just like it is wildly not the case that all jobs or contracts are awarded to nephews. Pitching is an art. Doing it well will raise your hit rate. Failing to do it at all, while either waiting for the world to recognize your genius or bemoaning the unfairness of it all, is an incredibly effective method to not get speaking gigs.

what you say is true, but it is probably more effective and easier to network with the organizers than to be good at pitching. that's not a bad thing! networking with the organizers will probably get you more job opportunities and open other professional doors too!

I'm one of the chairs at the conference Kate mentioned (O'Reilly Fluent) so I thought I'd provide some background.

Our keynotes were entirely invite only (O'Reilly often has sponsored keynotes, we did not) and Kate was invited based on her position in the field and because she's familiar with speaking at O'Reilly events, so we knew she would be good. All keynoters were invited on these merits (so yes, being known to O'Reilly or the chairs helps, but overall stature is just as important).

For regular sessions, a handful of people we knew would be good were invited directly into the program (perhaps 10% of the final program), a much larger number were invited to submit a proposal for review (perhaps 50% ended up being these people), and then about 40% were entirely from non-invited proposals, including several speakers who were new to speaking.

The most important thing to make it through our program committee was to get the proposal right. A good title, a good abstract and, in most (but not all) cases, having a track record in the discipline (even if you're not 'famous' for it). We did take a risk on several 'unknowns' to keep it interesting and in most cases, it played out well.

This is just how we did it, but it's not necessarily the 'best' way to do it (I don't think there is a 'best' way). Some conferences, for example, anonymize proposals, don't use proposals at all, are 100% invite only, or follow unconference formats. It's great to see a real variety and not everyone just following one approach.

I would say forget lists like this and just make reasonable preparations and be humble, open and honest. People can sense those qualities and you will have no problems.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com