Seating was tight: my husband is 6’6″ and just didn’t fit in any of the seats. We arrived very early, chose a seat for him at the end of a row, but he was asked to move over for a man who weighed in the +500 lb range. My husband was in pain all day with his legs jammed. I vote for a new venue.

The best part for me was just being with kindred “spirits” (as the saying goes) all day, since I live in an area that’s far-right Republican, fundy, and even has its own KKK. People who found the same things funny, knew the same names, followed the same podcasts, thought the same things important. The speakers and crew made themselves friendly and available to talk for a long time afterwards.

We made a 3-day weekend out of it in NYC for my 9-11 birthday and will definitely be back if it’s held again. If you hold it the same weekend you’ll get a Christian back in the hall!

I think one way to keep it fresh would be to invite skeptics who may not label themselves as such, like they did this year with Seth Shostack. Jeff Wagg was great and mentioned Consumer Reports as the best-selling skeptical magazine. You guys mentioned great kids shows like “Fetch with Ruff Ruffman” that teach science and critical thinking. Inviting people who do this kind of work to speak might be a way of injecting new voices into the movement. Other scientists, journalists, educators and consumer advocates that also fight for reason and critical thinking.

Thanks for all your work!

This got me thinking that the biggest problem that faces all of these sceptical conferences is that they run the risk of becoming insular. If an enthusiastic sceptic in London can’t get a ticket to the first TAM in his city what chance do other members of the public have?

Perhaps some individual tickets for certain lectures or workshops etc could be held back to be sold on the day? If they do this already apologies!

Though I’ve only been officially part of the skeptic movement for about 3 years and I’ve only attended two events, both this year, I see a dilema. How to we attend to all needs without being redundant?

There are core essentials to being a skeptic – the logical fallacies, the scientific method, and Bayes theorem are three that comes to mind immediately.

There are topics that are commonly addressed in skepticism. One group of topics may be lumped as debunking topics – counterattacking the anti vaccinationists, the young earth creationists, medical quackery, pseudoscience, conspiracy theorists, and the true woo believers who manipulate the public, such as psychics. A second grouping may be thought of as topics in science itself, such as medicine, biology, evolution, physics, astronomy and even chemistry. Thirdly, magic. And finally, skepticism and the media, which ranges from science fiction to music to movies/TV to publishing to communication strategies to the internet and beyond.

At meetings, we must be diverse, yet inclusive. Presently, I sense a great deal of redundancy. We must be diverse because, first of all, we are diverse, as we are scientists, physicians, IT people, artists, magicians, journalists, astrophysicists, actors, bartenders , atheists, agnostics, and apathetics. And we are also novel skeptics and experienced skeptics and somewhere inbetween.

I have attended many American and European diabetic meetings and I am ripping off my idea from how they present these meetings. Thus as we grow, especially at TAM and NECCS ( I have a feeling that Dragoncon may serve a different purpose, but since I did not attend I may be wrong ) I propose that each meeting have tracks specifically based on the discussed above sections – basics, debunking, what’s new in science, magic and media. I think in addition to tracks there should be a highlighted lectures ( that do not compete with other track meetings )in EACH of the above sections. You ,in part, addressed this with the well done medical offerings at TAM. The tradition of a live SGU session should also continue as it is a shared common joy for most. Finally , social events are necessary, as this was the major difference between TAM and NECCS and the opportunity to bond should be emphasized.

We need to serve the beginners and the advanced. As we grow, we must be careful not to excessively repeat ourselves, unless necessary for further learning.

I guess it’s time to send this nut-cases IP to the authorities…