Final approved conference management specification is documented here.

A key concept of the specification was to use streaming video to serve all participants on all sims an equal interactive experience with speakers. A benefit of this streaming video presentation is easy scalability for medium to large to extremely large numbers of participants.

The video resolution used was 320x240 to assure that all participants were able to handle the stream via their local internet connectors. Participants reported audio quality was satisfactory but that image quality was moderate, especially when information slides were shown during the pre-recorded presentations.

A recommended modification for next time would be to re-test the feasibility to use a 4X higher video resolution of 640x480. (640x480 was tested prior to this conference, however, the test audience reported that half COULD see the image OK but half could NOT. However, ALL could see it at 320x240.)

A recommended modification for next time would be to use simpler slides as part of the video presentation; and provide more detailed images, as needed, separately. For example, the "roadmap" slide was posted in world as a stand-alone image visible to all during the presentation.

At issue here is the use of detailed slides for medium to large conferences delivered in-world. High resolution imagery is always bandwidth-intensive, whether delivered as part of a dynamic video stream or as a static image slide show. For this conference, high-resolution slides were provided as part of the conference archive.

One participant suggested using their own guideline for slides: "Put no more on a slide than can be seen and read on a tee-shirt."

Conference information web site is documented here.

Event communications consisted of emails from the Director of Developer Relations, describing conference opportunities and timing, combined with a Conference Website, providing detailed program information including registration form, registration status, and email addresses for additional program and registration inquiries.

Final region settings are documented here. Final region key map is documented here.

A region consisting of nine (9) sims was established to serve keynote presentations to a specified potential capacity of 500 participants and staff (~55 per sim).

Registration projection based on trajectories (number of registrations per first week, second week, etc.) indicated 135 actual participants were likely. Therefore, six (6) regions were kept for keynote presentations, one (1) was re-tasked for an Expo and Discussion area, one (1) was re-tasked for Conference Archive; the remaining region was held as spare.

Actual registration was 142 served by 14 staff on five (5) sims (~35 per sim).

Keynote sims used a varied terraform but identical presentation areas consisting of open kiosks, video screens, video test areas for participants, flags, and signage. A benefit of this sim build approach is easy scalability for medium to large to extremely large numbers of participants.

Registration communications to participants are documented here. Final registration status is documented here.

Registration required several complexities: Applicants had to be listed Solution Providers, requiring communication with a Primary Registrant on file with Linden Lab. The primary registrant could then add two additional staff from their organizations. ALL registrants had to complete and return a signed NDA by fax or scan attached to email. SOME registrants qualified for a waiver of registration fee based on records with Linden Lab. The remainder were required to pay a registration fee that was discounted for registrations received before a time limit; a full fee was required after the time limit.

A key learning from this conference was that a significant fraction (~10%) of participants and staff were hesitant about providing signed confidentiality agreements. With additional clarification provided where needed, many of these concerns were alleviated and registrations were confirmed. However, 14 organizations originally submitting registration forms never supplied requisite NDA's, despite repeated follow ups.

Event staff recruiting, training, and scheduling are documented here.

Each presentation sim had one (1) Host and one (1) Moderator. Both assisted participants to answer program questions and assure they could see and hear the video. Both assisted participants to forward questions for the speakers during live Q&A.

Event staff were in communication at all times during the presentations with the Event Staff Manager and Conference Manager. The Conference Manager was in communication with the conference presentation room in San Francisco. Thus a two-way feedback loop allowed almost immediate adjustments in stream volume, individual reassurances to participants, etc.

Positive staff morale was positively remarked by several participants. In fact the informal staff motto to take care of participants was, "Keep 'em chirpy".

Audio video service specification is documented here.

See also Conference Management Specification for discussion of 320x240 vs. 640x480 video resolution.

A key learning of this conference is that real world video production companies, even ones that advertise expertise in "webcasting", are NOT fluent in Second Life needs. In particular, a high-quality high-capacity video stream may be had from Second Life companies that meet the need for, literally, less than one percent (1%) of what some real world companies are charging. That said, a quality video setup and camera for recording and live transmission are well-done by these companies and should continue to be used.

The stream inside of Second Life was easy. Getting the video feed TO the stream was a bigger deal than expected. For example, the tape used for the recording camera did not work in the camera used for live broadcast. The feed from the camera did not match the computer used for video-casting. All of these were resolved successfully but required several extra hours during setup.

Speaker content and presentation were positively remarked by participants.

A key learning of this conference is that pre-recording keynote speakers serves multiple purposes well. First, it requires presentations to be prepared and rehearsed early. This improves focus and consistency across speakers because the speaker coordinator is aware of, "Who is covering what" and because speakers know, "This is serious, I'm being recorded." Second, pre-recording provides a backup in case a key speaker is suddenly unavailable during the conference.

A second key learning is that live Q&A with speakers can be incorporated easily into the time slot immediately following the pre-recorded presentation. An delivery rate of one question delivered-and-answered-per-minute was achieved for all six keynote speakers. Breaking up presentation with Q&A also kept participants refreshed in what was an intense program schedule. Finally, live Q&A could even be achieved with the speaker calling in from a remote location and being present as their SL avatar but still video-streamed to the 142 participants. Something NOT possible using traditional one-avatar-one-region approaches.

Following speaker presentations, participants were split into small groups of about seven (7) to address a focus question.

A key learning of this conference was that focus groups CAN be done using text only, but that it must of necessity go slower than using voice. That said, the groups formed and began their work quickly and intently.

At issue for another time is whether to use SL Voice. For this conference it was rejected as a potentially disruptive detail (using streaming video with voice disabled in the region, then suddenly re-enabling voice and asking participants to turn it on). Another factor is the a substantial number of participants (~20%) do not like to use voice or have equipment issues with voice. Even on the Discussion day (where no video was streamed), the majority of participants stayed with text only.

The first day of breakout sessions enjoyed full participation. The second day about half left early. However, the participants remaining were as focused and intent as the first day.

Participation in the informal discussion times was much higher than expected. Two (2) two-hour sessions were scheduled and well attended. Some participants stayed a total of six (6) hours.

Half of registrants also set up information booths (70) in the Expo area.

A conference archive area was set up where participants could revisit ALL six video presentations and live Q&A. High-resolution copies of slide images were also made available. A benefit of having a conference archive is reaching participants in extreme time zones, and participants unable to make the scheduled times.

Grand Subtotal

6.2 KUSD

24.8 KUSD

18.6 KUSD (75%)

Grand Subtotal

-

4.0 KUSD (2 Days)

4.0 KUSD (100%)

Grand Subtotal

-

22.5 KUSD (30 Staffers)

22.5 KUSD (100%)

4.2 KUSD (140 Registrants)

105.0 KUSD (140 Registrants)

100.8 KUSD (96%)

Use of Video Streaming
zFire Xue: Very interesting to see some Lindens on video for the first time

Ability to Network
Ham Rambler: the SP group is so diverse... and just sitting talking to [other SP's ]makes me feel we can really learn from each other
iLike Loon: I think it's interesting to exchange opinions and suggestions now
Patrice Cournoyer: great sessions earlier
Patrice Cournoyer: making some good connections for future I think
Fim Fischer: Guys, it was great to be here at the conference with you today. I hope to see all of you again tomorrow
Patrice Cournoyer: great day
Kim Anubis: Have a great day, everyone. It was good chatting with you.

Program Content
Hiro Pendragon: It's VERY encouraging to see Linden Lab tailoring its future efforts to specialize for different uses
Maccus McCullough: maps looks interesting
Vasilisa Shilova: oh yes
Arian Writer: I like it
Roland Francis: applause on that
Goldie Goodman: Nice shadowing...
Maccus McCullough: outstanding - content reuse is a significant concern for our organization
Debs Regent: this is great
JoJa Dhara: great answers!!
Aki Shichiroji: ok. YES, we NEED Flash support. and interactivity with web in SL
Patrice Cournoyer: and the hits keep coming
Aki Shichiroji: yaay. document editing in world.
Elsa Dickins: oh cooooooool
Count Bayliss: OK - now they showed me Mesh and shadow - I wish they had not - I Want it now

Expo
Vryl Valkyrie: I have enjoyed seeing all the booths
Vryl Valkyrie: Seeing what everyone has to offer
Vryl Valkyrie: It really expands the horizons and is very inspirational to say the least.

Participation
Patrice Cournoyer: I am impressed at the number of SP
Vryl Valkyrie: Doesn't this almost feel like a kind of fair.. so love it It's been great chatting with you all.. cya later.. I'm off to my red [breakout discussion] area. :-)

Live Q&A
Vryl Valkyrie: I'm so honored they answered my question and SHOCKED!
Vryl Valkyrie: Thanks Glenn!
Vryl Valkyrie: and Moderator Ware :-)
Motorato Ware: just doing our job, m'am :-)
Ariella Languish: GOOD question
Vryl Valkyrie: Of course this will put LL in the market again as far as corporations are concerned who need the secure isolated server. This product will have great potential.
Shy Robbiani: .-'`'-. APPLAUSE APPLAUSE .-'`'-.

Future Conferences
Vryl Valkyrie: Yes I agree, I have enjoyed the entire conference and would love to see them held more often. It's a great learning experience.

Slide Legibility
Maccus McCullough: The video on the end is too blurry to get anything meaningful out of the picture.
Arian Writer: I agree
Goldie Goodman: The first rule of making graphics for video is, don't put more on the screen than you would on a T-shirt.
Larry Pixel: the slides are useless
Larry Pixel: can't read a word

Program Content
Roland Francis: that's old info
Larry Pixel: the last three custom last names I requested were all turned down -- they are not anything you like

Live Q&A
Anders Wildcat: Why are you fielding questions via IM and giving them to the speaker without attributing them to the person who ask them, I get the impression that these are pre-scripted questions. Using chat for Q&A is so much more dynamic...
Vryl Valkyrie: if any of them even get there.. seems like these are prescreened questions

Conference Archive
Anders Wildcat: The entire point of a Second Life meeting is to have a dynamic conversation in REAL TIME, your comments about "you get the PPT on Thursday" we'll answer the questions later in email, defeats the idea of a Second Life meeting!

Program Content
Gavrael Hawkeye: this is the same as with new technologies in the web. I was a web designer for years and I hated to dumb down my wonderful software all the time for the noobs in the web
Gavrael Hawkeye: but on the other hand we need to please them too

Live Q&A
JoJa Dhara: How do we explain this to our clients this goes beyond usual ... a laptop with a frog is answering great questions?

As an interim practice: Holding discussions in Text allows multilingual participants to follow better than in Voice.