[prepend]

I see the glut of bad talks (GP mentioned talks about talking about talking) as crowding out other, more valuable talks.

I’m not angry and don’t know if GP is, but it’s certainly worth pointing out and discouraging, if possible.

For me, it’s not that the talks aren’t valuable to some people. That’s neat. And the talk certainly helps the talker and their boss. I think it’s that the marginal value is low.

[ghaff]

I'm not sure I've ever seen a talk about giving talks at any tech conference I've ever attended. Personally, that sort of meta-topic doesn't sound like something I'd be inclined to pick as a conference organizer.

Certainly individuals will disagree about conference content. I know I've gotten evaluations that were simultaneously "too in-depth" and "too high-level" for the same talk!

Conference organizers are usually trying to choose talks that appeal to a range of people--both in depth and in topic area. Furthermore, they're usually not familiar with every speaker so some sessions that sound interesting--but aren't or are just poorly delivered--slip in.

And conference organizers just screw up too. Maybe they give undue weight to choosing something a bit random from someone they know. At the same time, many conferences these days are trying to encourage first-time speakers so it's not always the usual suspects. And, at some level, that means taking the good with the bad.