when i first read about BlogCampSwitzerland i was pretty exited: a swiss conference on blogs, organised by bloggers for bloggers, using the famous barcamp model, an unconference, where speakers can schedule their own talks, organised via a wiki, held at the famous ETH. naturally i was planning to attend it.
but then i spoke with someone (i am not sure if he wants his name mentioned here and it is too slow to ask him first, so let’s keep him unnamed for now), who looks at such things with a much more sceptical eye. he pointed out to me, that this conference was initiated and organised in large parts by among others peter hogenkamp [blogwerk] and remo uherek [trigami]; in other words, people who try to run a blog business. and after looking into this further i now find this whole thing pretty disgusting. in my opinion these blog entrepreneurs are blatently trying to trick people here. they are using all the right tools and terminologies, while their real goal is to push their respective businesses or at the very least to gain credibility in the swiss blogosphere.
now, let me please clarify here, i have nothing against people who want to make money with blogs or who are trying to push the commerical side of blogs, IF this is done so in a transparent manner. but the BlogBarCamp guys used the sneaky approach, making it look like a cool bottom up “unconference”, while it is really just a twisted marketing scam.
smart bloggers should boycott BlogCampSwitzerland!
Tags: blogcampswitzerland, conference (30), scam, unconference
Remo Uherek 00:54:43 on 5.3.2007 Permalink
Dear Jan
“people who try to run a blog business. and after looking into this further i now find this whole thing pretty disgusting.”
I can live with criticism, but I don’t exactly see the connection between ‘blog business’ and ‘disgusting’. I’d be happy if you could explain your reasoning.
“they are using all the right tools and terminologies, while their real goal is to push their respective businesses or at the very least to gain credibility in the swiss blogosphere.”
The main goal is not to push our businesses. That wouldn’t help us to gain credibility. We just want to organize a cool event. And yes, of course we want to benefit from that indirectly. Isn’t this legitimate in your eyes?
“the BlogBarCamp guys used the sneaky approach, making it look like a cool bottom up “unconference”, while it is really just a twisted marketing scam.”
I respect your opinion. But it would be fair to make such statements after having experienced the event on your own.
Cheers, Remo
Peter Hogenkamp 04:42:12 on 5.3.2007 Permalink
Hi Jan
Probably not to your surprise, I agree with Remo on this. I really don’t see your point.
What exactly have we done wrong (yet)? What exactly did you find out “after looking into this further”? Where’s the “twisted marketing scam”? I just don’t see any. Too bad that you’re just disgusted instead of explaining yourself in more detail. If there was anything I could really reply to, I gladly would.
True, Remo and myself are both trying to establish businesses dealing with blogs. Does that mean we’re not allowed to set up a non-commercial event that involves blogs and bloggers? If somebody who is into sports marketing during the week organized a Grümpelturnier on a Saturday, would that be a scam?
What could be the marketing scam regarding Blogwerk? Getting an additional 200 readers? Come on. Let’s assume for a moment that “neuerdings.com” (is it allowed to mention a commercial blog in a comment here?) would sponsor this event. Let’s further assume that on March 24 I’ll display the “neuerdings.com” URL, all day long, in as many places as possible (again, just to be on the safe side, I’m not planning to do anything like that, I never did). My guess would be that I would drive less than 50 new unique visitors to the site. Why? Because the other 150 people either forget or don’t care about it – or have been on the site already anyway. If this was just to get a handfull of new readers, it would be a very inefficient way.
What else? Finding new authors for Blogwerk? So what? At BlogCamp, ALL people will be able to express whether they’re offering something or looking for something, privately or professionally (like on line 2 and 3 of any XING profile). I think that can work at a non-commercial event without corrupting the event in any way. As Remo and myself will have no special exposure (I will probably do the opening remarks, but, again, no banners involved), we will be just 2 guys in 200.
The other day I met a student who made an interesting remark: “So now that you’re trying to set up blogging as a business, does that mean you never have a day off?” After some consideration, I replied: “I guess so, but if you make your hobby your job, there’s no point in complaining afterwards.” (And btw, it’s not true, as I was just on vacation without blogging for a full week.)
I was at BarCamp last year (not making any contact that has been relevant for my business, IIRC), and I simply loved it, so when Dominik asked me, if I wanted to help organize BlogCamp, I happily agreed. I see this as a community event for the Swiss blogosphere.
Why don’t you just attend and see for yourself? If afterwards you come to the conclusion that it was just a scam, let’s talk again. Or should we set up a panel at BarCamp: “Is this just a marketing scam organized by Blogwerk and trigami?” Due to the nature of the event, you could bring it up. I would certainly attend…
Peter
j. zup[ping]er 07:53:01 on 5.3.2007 Permalink
@ uherek: interesting choice of quote and response. you almost managed to make me look like someone who is anti-commercial. but i also said, and i quote: “let me please clarify here, i have nothing against people who want to make money with blogs or who are trying to push the commerical side of blogs, IF this is done so in a transparent manner.”
@ hogenkamp: nothing wrong per se with “somebody who is into sports marketing during the week organized a Grümpelturnier on a Saturday”. but alot wrong if its not made transparent who is organising it and why. what i think was called for is a simple disclaimer, stating that some of the guys organising this conference run businesses envolving blogs.
Peter Hogenkamp 09:55:47 on 5.3.2007 Permalink
Hi Jan
I think you’re just repeating instead of explaining your point. Instead of coming to BlogCampSwitzerland on March 24, you could as well attend a Grümpelturnier in a rural area. You may be surprised to find the shirt sponsor and president of the football club and coach of the junior team (and biggest employer around) to be all the same person. From what I learned in my 16 years in Switzerland, they call it Milizsystem, and it works reasonably well.
But to be as transparent as possible, I just added a section “Organizing Committee” on top of the wiki page. Now, of course, somebody could argue: The organizers are trying to promote themselves by pushing their company names in a very prominent position.
Oh well… Allen Leuten recht getan ist eine Kunst, die niemand kann.
Peter
Remo Uherek 10:45:46 on 5.3.2007 Permalink
Jan: So the lack of transparency was your main criticism, right? Sorry, I did not get that right away.
As Peter mentioned we added the section “Organizing Committee” on the blogcamp.ch-page. Is this transparent enough or is there missing something important?
For the record: It was never our intention to hide our backgrounds. We simply thought linking to our XING-profiles would be enough information.
Remo
Peter Hogenkamp 01:15:17 on 6.3.2007 Permalink
That’s exactly what I was thinking.
j. zup[ping]er 07:26:36 on 6.3.2007 Permalink
@ hogenkamp: fantastic rethorics there. first you criticize me of just repeating myself instead of explaining. then you go on to (just) repeat your point.
well, it really IS that simple! there IS nothing further to explain. it is my stated opinion, and please bare with me while i repeat myself, that you guys used the sneaky approach here, tried to use the “cool” tool of an unconference in order to gain credibility for your buisnesses. voila. that’s all i have to say about it. and i hereby did. repeatedly.
@ uherek: ofc it’s all about transparency. nice that you finally do list the organising comittee on the page, and, surprise surprise, the page looks now marketly different. i as a potential attendee have more information to help me make up my mind. assumptions just never work, to assume links to XING profiles should be enough, just does not pan. this is the age of transparency, all the burried information will slip out eventually, and some idiot will yell it out on his blog. as i just did.
and as a btw. i do see a parallel to trigami here and this is also why i think your business model is doomed, mate. paying bloggers to plug content, that’s just soooo last century marketing.
@ both: i am done here. i stated my point, my opinion. and we might never agree. the question is, as always, is what i claim true or not? the fact that you are getting sooo defensive about it now … oh well, let’s not go there. in the end the truth will always reveal itself.
Peter Hogenkamp 08:43:21 on 6.3.2007 Permalink
Hi Jan
Point taken. Understood, but disagreed. I think you’re right, we can end the discussion here.
I’m glad (no irony here) you like the new wiki page section about the committee. It would have meant no problem for me to have it from the beginning. So now we have it, three weeks prior to the event, and since everybody will look at the wiki again, they can make a sound decision.
Peter
Remy 10:02:15 on 7.3.2007 Permalink
My humble opinion is that you guys get a little bit too religious about this stuff. At the end of the day, if blogcamp is a success it will grow and if it sucks it will die. If it becomes a marketing scam event, people will notice it and not come back. Which is most likely not in the interest of the organizer. Same with payed blogs, if a blog becomes a marketing plattform, people will stay away, but if the infos are good the readers will read on.
Matthias 15:19:24 on 7.3.2007 Permalink
@Remy, I’d have to do research to back this up with data, but my impression is that paid reviews tend to be more positive than unpaid reviews. Whether that makes the info good or bad remains to be seen.