Rearranging the standard panel

[JKonopka]

I know of at least two people who feel awkward in the standard panel room layout. By which I mean one or more people at a table at the front of the room and rows of chairs facing those people.
It does have a sort of dry, professorial/corporate feel to it.

Maybe we could do something to make panel rooms feel more like open hang-outs where a themed discussion happens to be taking place?

[Vyrdolak]

We ARE, in fact, going to make an effort to get away from the standard "talking heads at the front of the room, take questions at the end" format, and toward a more flexible, participatory, open discussion model. This will evolve more as I assign panels to people and then we start talking about specifics.

[CFink]

There's nothing stopping you from having "workshops" or "seminars" in addition to panels.

[MWhitehouse]

I think there is nothing wrong with the people in front of the room format as long as the people behind the table are more qualified than the people in front of the table. Too often at cons, the people running the panel are merely equally qualified, or even less qualified than the audience to speak on the topic. When that is the case, it makes sense to have a more round table discussion.

However, as I have gotten older and more mature, I have come to learn as an audience member that I would much rather listen to someone who knows more than me rather than speak. I would much rather sit in a room listening to a highly qualified speaker hold forth on a topic rather than listening to some punter in the audience who thinks he's an expert.

Round tables are good. Presentations are good. Panels that have modestly qualified panelists where the audience kinds of takes over and kind of doesn't are not good.

[Vyrdolak]

Don't worry, Michael. It will depend entirely on the panel topic.