Enter your keyword

Why I Won’t Be Attending Mom 2.011

Why I Won’t Be Attending Mom 2.011

Let me start by apologizing for the self-important topic and for the general who-gives-a-shit, Anna? response many of you will have to this post. The absurdity of me writing a post about not attending a conference is not lost on me, but after recommending Mom 2.0 to anyone and everyone who has asked me about good business-oriented conferences within in the mom blogosphere, I feel like some explanation is necessary for why I’m no longer endorsing it or attending it myself.

Disclosure: I submitted a panel idea for this years’ Mom 2.0 conference (on the topic of maintaining trust capital while still making a living online) which was rejected. I assume many people will think this is why I have changed my mind about the conference, but actually, I had had planned all along upon attending the conference regardless of whether or not I was chosen to speak (and, indeed figured there was little chance I would be chosen to speak given . . . several factors). My experience last year had been well worth the investment without speaking and I had no reason to believe that this year would be any different. However, after reviewing the loose agenda and the speakers list released last week, I’ve decided my money is better invested elsewhere. My reasoning is listed below.

1. Panels have been cut by 25%

My primary concern about endorsing this conference is that the panel time has been cut by one fourth so that there can be an afternoon spent on “practical application” of ideas presented in the panels “in real life.” The opportunities for practical application will ostensibly be presented by activities such as swamp tours and fashion walks in New Orleans — a claim that raises more questions than it answers. I understand that it is several months before the conference and as such, the complete ideas are probably not fully formed, but what this whole thing smacks of to me, frankly, is a choice opportunity for highly paid sponsor product placement for the conference organizers at the expense of conference attendees. And if that’s not what they have planned, then it should be, because it’s an excellent opportunity for getting a bunch of bloggers to take pictures of each other next to signs that say French Market or Who Dat or whatever it is they sell in New Orleans, and then tweet it all over the planet. Good for them, I say: I’m just not interested in supplementing it with $500* from my already sparse conference budget.

In the interest of trying to determine the actual content of this mysterious third session and its utility to people who read this blog, I’ve had several conversations with the Mom2summit Twitter account and the info@mom2summit email account this week (these accounts are apparently empowered with the capacity of speech, as if they have their own human subjectivity). The Mom2summit Twitter account initially contacted me in response to some tweets I made expressing concern about the third session. I asked the account what the third session (the “time off” as I worded it, and the “application time” as the mom2summit email account worded it) would offer to bloggers who are interested in learning how to land private ads or sponsorship deals, because I see that as a primary concern for my readership. The twitter account told me that monetization would be covered in the first two sessions, but that maybe the Twitter account could add something in the third part. I asked the Twitter account to give me a formal statement via email, and this is what the info@mom2summit.com account was able to compose for me:

We are still in the process of developing this Saturday programming, but it will be designed to include opportunities for the diversity of attendees’ interests, subject lines, and content needs. For instance, we have mentioned a French Quarter fashion tour, which will be a smaller outing for fashion bloggers, site owners, and media to tour the country’s oldest perfumery and to visit with one of the leading hat designers in the world. That’s just one of the 10 to 15 options. Another will be a video session, where those interested in adding video content to their site will be able to develop a video blog entry with the help of a professional crew. There will be a tour and discussion with educational leaders for those who blog on political or public policy issues. For those exclusively interested in “landing private ads or sponsorship deals”, there will be a more in-depth strategy session on business-development application, coupled with a traditional Ritz-Carlton tea service, that will cover that topic.

Some of these options are no doubt interesting from an objective standpoint, but they don’t really meet my personal needs for a business conference. You might have surmised that the last bit was added in response to my query, so there is now a potential option for people who are not interested in a swamp tour and who are not able to get onto the perfumery short list (pro tip: if you are going with the thought of getting onto the perfumery shortlist — don’t is my advice, unless your last name is Armstrong). The response from the mom2summit email account is much longer than this, and includes references to requests from last year’s attendees for “more case studies.” While I wholeheartedly respect the email account’s desire to meet the needs of the conference attendees, I’m a little confused about what this means, unless we are talking about case studies in the sense that people study them in business school, in which case — nope, still confused as to how that involves visiting a hat designer. And now my head is hurting.

It might be that my interests are not diverse enough to go to a conference organized by a corporate email account working in conjunction with an anonymous Twitter handle. In which case, nicely played, electronic agents of unknown third-party social media maven behest!

2. The speaker lineup is light on business/monetizing expertise.

The speaker lineup released on Friday includes one person I would enjoy seeing speak, an executive from Yahoo Shine who sounds semi-interesting, five dads, and a few other people who are mainstays from the mommyblogging speaking circuit. I’m not going to go into a lot of detail here because there’s not a whole lot of reason to, but suffice to say that from where I’m sitting there’s not a whole lot on this agenda that is fleshing out to be innovative from the perspective of business or monetization. This was not the case last year — last year there was all kinds of stuff shared that was not available elsewhere in the mommyblogosphere. People were speaking whom I had not seen speak elsewhere, and they were sharing information that was not shared elsewhere. The list posted is not the full list of speakers, but this list posted suggests a trend, and that trend does not suggest good things to me for the kind of content in which I am interested, or in which the readers of this blog tend to be interested. It doesn’t mean the conference won’t be enjoyable: I just don’t think it will be a good return on investment for people who are looking for a business conference.

*3. 25% cut out of this conference, for me, works out to about $500. A $500 reduction in value, plus a decidedly fluffier agenda, makes Mom 2.0 look like a smaller, more expensive incarnation of BlogHer.

A round trip plane ticket from Los Angeles to New Orleans costs $400-500, and three nights at the Ritz Carlton costs about $700, even without room service. Even with my cheaper conference ticket (I bought it last May for $310), with food and incidentals factored in, I would be looking at close to a $2,000 price tag for attending this conference. I’m willing to pay that much for a conference and indeed have on several occasions, but with a lighter agenda and with 25% of the panels cut out, that makes this conference into a smaller, more expensive version of BlogHer. And the one thing that BlogHer has is that it is BlogHer, and that everybody goes to BlogHer — the only argument for spending money on Blogher is the ubiquity of it. A smaller conference has its benefits, but it loses those once it tries to emulate the bigger, crappier one that only has value in ubiquity. Some of these events will probably be fun, but for this amount of money, and time away, I need a higher ROI to justify it.

Caveat: Maybe, *maybe* consider going if you are a newer blogger who wants a chance to meet big name bloggers.

When I was thinking about reasons to go to this conference, I realized that there might be a reason to go if you are a newer blogger who wants a chance to meet some of the big name bloggers in a smaller setting. Several of them are likely to be at this conference (e.g. Dooce, Maggie Mason, The Bloggess, Design Mom, possibly Finslippy?), and it is much easier to get a chance to meet and talk to them in this context than it is at a big conference like BlogHer. Is that worth paying $2,000? I kind of doubt it, but I thought I should leave that possibility open because it is a legitimate plus of this conference. And I’m guessing that it will be far better run than you would imagine would be possible for an outfit run by a corporate Twitter account and an anonymous email account. I’m just not confident that it will have the same kind of business cache it had last year. I would be happy to be proven wrong, though.

Comments (37)

  1. Mel
    Oct 31, 2010

    Hi Anna, Just wondering if you have the line up from last year available to compare to? I would like to see it since you say ‘People were speaking whom I had not seen speak elsewhere, and they were sharing information that was not shared elsewhere.’ I agree this year’s list doesn’t look that interesting but would enjoy seeing who they were able to invite to speak last year. Thanks!!

  2. Oct 31, 2010

    They actually still have it up on their website, you can see it here: http://www.mom2summit.com/schedule/

    And their keynote was particularly good last year, it was Design Mom, Dooce, and Maggie Mason. Design Mom’s portion was excellent in particular.

  3. Mel
    Oct 31, 2010

    Wow compared to this years speaker list so far, last year was a great year to go. I would bet that many of those sessions were pretty interesting and worthwhile. Thanks for the link!

  4. Oct 31, 2010

    I wonder if part of the change in speakers is because finding quality online talent to lead panels and keynotes is hard to maintain year after year. I mean if they had Dooce, Maggie Mason, and Design Mom last year, what’s the next step from that? In the same vein, I know this year’s BlogHer closing keynote left me scratching my head. “Who are these people and why should I care?” Where as previous year’s closing keynotes were awesome with big names addressing interesting topics. I think after a few years these conferences just sort of burn all their bridges and have no where left to go.

  5. Oct 31, 2010

    I’d consider going just for the opportunity to engage with the dads, but as an old time dad blogger I am kind of biased.

  6. Oct 31, 2010

    Holy cow. That is…a big change. I had actually considered going based on what you’d said about it from last year, but I think I’ll pass. For me to get away from home and spend that kind of money…well, it’s a big deal. That content would not be worth it for me.

    I never understand why anyone ever thinks it’s a good idea to communicate without using the first and last name of the human doing the typing…it’s bad enough on Twitter, but to use a nonhuman email address is just weird and creepy.

  7. Oct 31, 2010

    I am probably going to regret chiming in, but here goes. (Full disclosure for folks other than Anna, in case you didn’t check the list or haven’t connected the dots: I’m one of the speakers, though of course I speak only for myself and not for the conference.)

    I don’t know everyone on the list that’s been released, though I think that’s only 1/4 of the folks who will eventually be announced, and I’m not sure you can assume whatever’s released there is predictive of what’s coming next, but that’s debatable and neither of us really knows, so whatever. Anyway. Of those 15 people already released, I know at least 9 of them make their living through various methods of blogging (maybe—probably—more; those are just the ones I know). So while I think you raise some valid concerns about the changed format of the conference (honestly, I have concerns about that second day as well), I think saying “the speaker lineup is light on business/monetizing expertise” is simply factually incorrect no matter how you spin it. And it kills me when you do that, Anna, because you have so much of value to add to these conversations, but when you get something like that wrong, it makes it really hard to take what you’re saying seriously.

    Or maybe I’m misunderstanding what you mean by business and monetizing expertise; to my mind, it’s what enables someone to build a career in this space out of nothing and make a living wage (or better). Do you have a different definition? ๐Ÿ˜‰

  8. Oct 31, 2010

    I see what you’re saying and I agree to a certain extent. But while those three have a great deal of name recognition there are a ton of other people who have a lot to offer as regular panelists. We don’t know who they are going to have as keynote speakers yet — it’s possible they are going with the same lineup this year as they did last year, and even if they did not, they could go with somebody like Ree Drummond, or MckMama or NieNie or any one of the eight hundred thousand Mormons who are making full time incomes from their blogs. Those people may not be as recognizable to every single person in the way as Dooce is, but to people doing the math they are as significant and have as much to teach, if not more, as others do.

    But my chief complaint was really not about keynotes so much as it was about the regular panel lineup, which is really not as impressive from a business perspective in comparison to last year. There are some repeats already, even among the people already listed, and we can expect that the people not yet listed will be taken from the stock of usual suspects who always appear on these lists. I am trying very hard to be diplomatic here, because I recognize that many of these people may have lots to add to a conference for people who have other priorities from my own. They just are not likely to add aspects in which I am personally particularly invested.

  9. Oct 31, 2010

    Yes, not only will there be many dads, they are from the old skool, it appears.

  10. Oct 31, 2010

    They didn’t want to speak directly to me, clearly. As a person. That was clear.

  11. Oct 31, 2010

    That is not to say that I am not interested in meeting the new guys because I certainly am. Many of them are doing some incredible things. But after 6.5 years of blogging I am very curious to talk to some old timers and ask some questions that are specific to long time blogging.

  12. Oct 31, 2010

    Mir, you and the Yahoo Shine person are the people that I would be interested in hearing speak out of that lineup. When I say “light on monetizing experience,” I mean light. Maybe people are making their livings, fine, but that doesn’t mean they are doing it under historical circumstances that are similar or comparable to me. Or that they can teach me or my readers anything. Does it make me an asshole to say that? Maybe.

    I’m in kind of a tough position here, Mir. Suffice to say that I have A LOT of other thoughts on this situation that I’d love to share with you and everyone, but I really don’t see how I can do that without totally negating every other semi-reasonable point I’ve made. This is not a straight meritocracy kind of situation. There are a lot of politics and we both know it. I would not ordinarily write a post like this for a variety of reasons, but because I felt like my integrity had been compromised by a conference that I had recommended to many people suddenly being turned into a smaller, more expensive version of Blogher, I felt obligated to say something, regardless of how awkward it might be. I’m sorry that you are caught in the middle, it’s not what I wanted or intended.

  13. Oct 31, 2010

    I agree that keynotes don’t have to be big Dooce level names, and you’re right they could still pull out some interesting people for the keynotes. I think I’m just being overly pissy about the conference in general because I’m so upset over the “experience” portions of it.

  14. Oct 31, 2010

    Mir, I’d like to see you speak, and I really appreciate your column on Work It, Mom. But, and these are just my feelings in general, unrelated to Mom 2.0, I’m kind of tired of seeing the same faces over and over again, you know? It’s not that we know their entire story, but how many times can we be pummeled with the same ten bloggers? It leaves the feeling that there isn’t any room for anyone else to self-promote or actually make any money, because if you just looked at the speaker list for all the damn conferences, it’s the same ten to twenty bloggers. Over and over again. For like, YEARS.

    That’s not taking away anything from them — I LIKE them. But sometimes I feel like I’ve learned all I’m going to learn from them at this point.

  15. Oct 31, 2010

    And to be clear, I didn’t mean you in that same group. You are accessible and bring something fresh and went about things in a non-traditional path compared to some.

  16. Oct 31, 2010

    I. Um. Thank you? ๐Ÿ˜‰

    What you’ve said here is a little different than what you said initially, and I take less issue with this (it’s not what you think jives with what you want/need to hear, which is different than folks not having any relevant experience at all), though I’m still a little puzzled. I think there are politics at play everywhere; the game (to me) is sticking to venues where they’re kept to a minimum. My experience at Mom 2.0 last year was tremendous and as drama- and game-free as any conference I’ve ever attended. Personally, I have no reason to expect less this year, even if it turns out that the “experiential” portion of the program is simply not my cup of tea.

    Saying what you did doesn’t make you an asshole (in my opinion—which together with a buck will get you a cup of crappy coffee), it makes you someone with strong opinions. But I do think it’s important to distinguish opinion from fact, is all. I respect your decision that this one isn’t for you. I would just really rather you make that point without a fell-swoop indictment of a group of folks who may have plenty to offer to other folks, y’know?

  17. Oct 31, 2010

    You’re pretty. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    No, seriously, I hear you. (And thank you for the kind words.) I agree, I think it’s a losing balancing act to try to juxtapose the new and fresh against the folks people want/need to see because they’ve managed not just success, but longevity. And I don’t know what the answer is.

    Again, I’ll just reiterate: My experience at Mom 2.0 last year was great, and I don’t know if they can duplicate it this year, but I guess I tend to come down more on the charitable let’s-wait-and-see side, given what they accomplished last year. (Also: Only a quarter of the speakers have been announced! Maybe we’re the crappy ones and the other three-quarters are the awesome ones!)

  18. Oct 31, 2010

    I do think they have stuff to offer other people. But not my readers necessarily. Not people who are trying to figure out how to monetize their blogs now, who do not have somebody to whom they are married who was the first well-known mommyblogger, say, or if they are not bloggers who started their blogs before 2004. That’s my issue with the monetization angle. And there are politics everywhere, yes. I agree that last year there weren’t many at Mom 2.0, and that’s part of why I had recommended it to people. It is my contention that this is not the case this year. I don’t really want to go into a lot of detail for why I think that because it makes me look like a douchebag. Or more of a douchebag than I already do.

  19. Oct 31, 2010

    I think there are ways in for a few people but you have to do it in very specific, regimented ways, if looking at these lists is any indication. And that is frustrating, because if you are like me, that is just not possible. I’m not going to . . . do what would be necessary to take up one of those one or two slots that is allotted to new people each year. Even if I were willing to do what is apparently required, my readers would hate me for it, because for me to do it would require a total departure from my brand. And that would be counterproductive.

  20. Oct 31, 2010

    I can see your point on a few things but I have to disagree with your assumption that your readers wouldn’t find value in the Mom 2.0 Summit. After all, I’m one of your readers and I love Mom 2.0. It’s small and intimate and you get a chance to connect with people on a much deeper level. Plus, everyone’s so nice and there’s no drama and no perceived hierarchy. Maybe it’s just that the smaller crowd makes it easier for me to put aside my anxiety and actually enjoy my time there and make meaningful contacts but whatever it is, this is my favorite conference personally. I haven’t been told yet if I’m speaking this year but I’ll be there as an attendee either way because I love it. Part of that is just personality, I suppose. I know you liked the BlogWorld conference but when I went last year I felt terrified and overwhelmed by the sheer heft of people. I was a keynote speaker at BlogWorld last year but I opted not to attend this year because for me it was a bit too we-take-ourselves-very-seriously-and-if-you-don’t-have-a-business-plan-and-elevator-pitch-you’re-not-worth-talking-to. Of course, I probably felt that way just because it’s the biggest blogging conference around and I have social anxiety. Bad combo. The emotional baggage we bring with us always colors what it is we actually perceive.

    I’m sad you’re not coming this year because I enjoyed talking with you there last year but I totally understand how different types of conferences speak to different types of people.

    PS. You should just email Laura if you want a personal response. Just email me if you don’t already have her email address and I’ll give it to you. ๐Ÿ™‚

  21. Nov 1, 2010

    I’m curious to know what your ‘dream conference’ would look like, Anna. I mean, I have something of an idea of your preferences, but don’t know real specifics by a long shot.

    If there isn’t something out there that is for you, maybe it’s time to craft your own?

  22. Nov 1, 2010

    MIR. You are kinda awesome for leaving a comment here and speaking your mind. ๐Ÿ™‚

    I have no interest in attending. Or any other conference. And yes I have done them. I make a living as a blogger, and frankly I don’t have the time to take off to attend these conference. My time is spent working in the profession of blogging. And I will not speak at these conferences without being compensated. Oh the irony. Not a bitch thing; A business thing.

    BUT. I am sure there is value for many many bloggers to attend. I know there is! After all I get hired to do public speaking and break out events, so I know there is a real need for this educational type seminars. I am sure you are going to offer great value to this conference….

    Anna you don’t need to explain why you are not attending. We understand.

  23. Nov 1, 2010

    “I asked the Twitter account…the Twitter account told me…. ” this is funny. Makes me think the twitter account is robotic humanoid species programmed to spit out answers. Which it indeed might be. LOL!

  24. Nov 1, 2010

    I’m going to go ahead and admit that I’m a little nervous about leaving a comment here, but oh well. . .

    I am a New Orleans area blogger who is going to be attending Mom 2.0. I was already completely excited about Mom 2.0 before I knew that the location would be moved to New Orleans. I am still planning on attending although I will admit that the speaker list wasn’t exactly what I was hoping for. I still expect there to be a lot of interesting attendees in a small setting and that’s part of the appeal–not just the topics presented.

    Now I’m going to let my bias show. As a New Orleans native, I am extremely proud of this city and what is happening here. I can see why the creators of this conference might be interested in letting bloggers from around the country see the innovative things that are going on. There’s a fairly robust community in tech, fashion, film, and of course, food. Just looking at the vague descriptions you gave, I can see some of the connections that Laura and Carrie are trying to create and I’m happy about it. I think that this is also a way to differentiate this conference from the many other blogging conferences that are springing up.

    I agree with Jenny that this conference does offer the advantage of a smaller size. I’m not at all shy–attending Blog World Expo by myself this year and was fine–but the Blogher experience always sounds completely overwhelming. The talk of swag and hurt feelings and second-tier party invites has pretty much convinced me that I wouldn’t be happy there. Will I be happy at Mom 2.0? I have no idea, but based on people’s response to last year, I think I have a better chance there than at Blogher.

  25. Nov 1, 2010

    Jenny, I loved Mom 2.0 last year and I had a great time, I had a great time meeting you and totally agree with your evaluation of what Mom 2.0 was last year. That’s why I’ve spent the last 8 months talking it up and promoting it to people who have asked me about good conferences. I absolutely agree that a small conference is good and that there is still value for some people in this conference. It is not my desire to sabotage this conference. I really just feel like I had been giving it my wholehearted endorsement, which is not something I do easily and I cannot do that anymore, and so I felt I had to write a post in order to remove that endorsement as surgically as possible.

    It’s not something I’m particularly proud of to create a post that’s now searchable about this conference and have it out there, to make it seem like I’m just shitting all over somebody else’s creation. That’s not what I want to do AT ALL. They have a good conference. It is not good for my purposes anymore, though, and it is not something I can endorse or recommend to my readers who want a business conference. And if I have to weigh the value of my endorsement in those terms (trust capital, the topic on which I would have liked to speak) with their conference getting semi-negative press, unfortunately they lose. It’s not ideal, but it’s also not disastrous: I think it’s pretty clear from this post that I’m talking about a specific kind of conference-goer and other kinds can go to this conference and be fine.

  26. Nov 1, 2010

    You know, Katy, I was thinking that earlier today. NOLA is sort of its own entity, and it’s possible that because of its iconic location that the afternoon makes total sense — I guess why NOT include the city in some part of the conference? I can’t speak to how it fits with the business agenda because I didn’t go last year, and I’m not going this year, so I’ve given it zero thought. Well, except for this one.

    For the record, I was really happy at BlogHer, and I’m a total introvert, was invited to ZERO parties, came home with no swag, didn’t get my feelings hurt once, and hung out with great, totally uncool (in the Big Blog Sense) people who were awesome. So don’t write that one off completely yet. If it was convenient to me, I’d do it again in a heartbeat.

  27. Nov 1, 2010

    I don’t know that I have a dream conference. I look at conferences as being a means to an end, and I expect to get a good return on my investment of time and money given my objectives of promoting my site/”brand” and getting tips/pointers on how to do that in the future. I definitely got a good return in those terms from Mom 2.0 last year. I got a good return from BlogWorld Expo in those terms. I see BlogHer as a necessity in this field, kind of a break-even, necessary investment if you want to be in the mommyblogging space. I don’t see a potential return in those terms, from going to Mom 2.0 this year, which is why I’m not going and not recommending it for other people with the one exception for people who are interested in networking with big name bloggers in a smaller environment, given that rather high price tag (or if they are close by, because then it won’t cost as much).

    Re my own conference, not to mince words, but I cannot even get on a panel, so I think filling an entire conference at this point would be overly ambitious.

  28. Nov 1, 2010

    Well, in the case of having to answer questions it wishes didn’t exist, yes, perhaps.

  29. Nov 1, 2010

    It will be a lot less expensive for you, so right away you have a much different reason to go from me. You will likely enjoy it quite a bit. What Jenny says about the smaller environment is absolutely true. That part makes it great. The speaker lineup is disappointing, but if you’re not having to pay for hotel or flight, that takes the sting out. If I were you, I would definitely go because all you’re paying for is a ticket. Even if the speaker lineup is crap, you can still meet all the biggies. It will be worth it for you.

    Let me know if you want a cheap ticket, incidentally. ๐Ÿ™‚

  30. Nov 1, 2010

    I am going to be super pissed if this turns out to be a smaller, more expensive BlogHer. I have LOVED BlogHer, but I bought an early bird pass to Mom 2.0 because of all the things I heard that were DIFFERENT about this particular conference.

    My biggest concern was the dad enthusiasm. I don’t want to hear from Jon Armstrong at MOM 2.0. I am beyond disappointed about this.

    (and full disclosure: I had a panel about blogging SEO rejected also)

  31. Nov 1, 2010

    What I love about the fact that they chose Jon Armstrong is that of all the photos of the speakers, he’s the only one whose spouse is also shown in the photo. Because, apparently, we wouldn’t know who he was unless they reminded us. Or something.

    I’m sure this makes me an asshole…but I’m very amused by that.

  32. Nov 1, 2010

    I’ve already got my ticket, but thanks for the offer!

  33. becky
    Nov 1, 2010

    At least you got a response. I tried asking some questions last year – just some general things to help me make my decision about going. Email, twitter, etc. Never even got an auto-response. Just silence.

  34. Nov 1, 2010

    Hi Anna. Just getting back to civilization after a weekend away from Internet and catching up to your piece here. I’m just speaking for myself here…not the entire conference..but I hate to hear your initial impressions, because they don’t at all match up with my strong understanding of this year’s planned event.

    We created Mom 2.0 as a conversation between moms and marketers…and we have always obtained quality feedback about the content of the conference. It’s a big deal to us. And I am more excited about the content of this year’s conference than I ever have been. Times a hundred.

    Mom 2.0 is in a new venue this year for the first time, and based on the new venue and feedback from last year’s attendees, we decided to roll out some additional content (and to think about how we all present this content) in a fresh, new way. We’ve also learned a lot already from NOLA, and from the people there. And, I can’t wait for everyone else to experience this.

    I hate that you believe that the experience won’t be as rich for you. You have historically shown that you have a lot to add to the conversation around blogging and marketing, and if you don’t attend, your voice will be missed.

    In the meantime, I’ll be dedicating my life to this for the next six months. I feel pretty strongly about its quality. And I can’t wait for April.

  35. Nov 2, 2010

    i was thinking the same thing about seeing the same people at all the conferences. branch out, people.

  36. Jen
    Nov 2, 2010

    I submitted an idea that it sounds like from this conversation would’ve been a good idea but never once heard back. Silence is louder sometimes.

  37. Jenny
    Nov 2, 2010

    I admit that I feel the same way. So far, everything about this feels like a BlogHer redone for more money and not a whole lot more to offer. I don’t want to pay for that. I am hoping the promised speakers they have not mentioned yet are speakers that are fresh and can bring something new to the table. So far, I’m not planning on going with the lineup they have released. I imagine only one or two have something new to say from the list I’ve seen so far. I think maybe Mom 2.0 is only for the newest of new bloggers.

    On the bright side, I’m not sad if I have to miss it anymore.

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published.