Something I didn't fully realize until starting to put together @FounderSummit is just how incredibly strong opinions many people have around particular instantiation of the idea of "speakers" at conferences 
-
Show this thread
-
Example. My thinking on paying speaking fees is if you pay some folks you need to pay them all. If you pay them all you need tons of sponsors to make the economics work and then sponsors become your customer, not attendees. So we don't pay speakers. Folks have *opinions* on this
5 replies 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
I feel it mostly stems from the speaking industrial-complex, where some famous folks demand $30k-$100k+ to show up and talk. This has trickle down effects to everything that feels vaguely conference-y creating all kinds of landmines
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @tylertringas
I think it is less downstream from professional speakers, who most tech people have a) not met and b) not interacted with materially at conferences, and instead it is upstream of people who believe that speaking is professional-opportunity-enhancing.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @patio11 @tylertringas
In this reading, not paying a speaker is not only not compensating someone for professional work, it is "hoarding opportunity" among the set of people who can fund their own conference attendance/tolerate the opportunity cost/etc.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
(I think this is largely because people overestimate the necessity and absolute economic impact of social capital among the set of people who attend the conference circuit, and because conferences are *highly visible and legible* social capital.)
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.