It’s official - the Office 2.0 Podcast Jam Is On! Anne tossed out the idea recently (you really need to read the full comment thread on that fantastic post) and the idea has got legs. She called my bluff and I’m in, along with a bunch of other blogge…

Elise: I loved the Get Deeply Geeky link! Thanks so much for this. Changed my whole perception of BlogHer. Susan.

Amy: LOL. Probably. I have to say that in our post-conference survey the majority of folks who attended think it’s cool to go through that little extra effort to communicate to the “outside world.” But it did give me food for thought.

Susan: A BlogHer Tech is totally within the realm of possibility. We introduced our first sub-conference for early next year, BlogHer Business, due to exactly that kind of push/pull from the community. You should check out this post at BlogHer describing some of what happened during the Get Deeply Geeky session. I know names/emails were collected and future actions discussed. If nothing else I know I’ll be on the look-out for a tech programming “chair” for BlogHer ‘07. I am not geeky enough.

I agree–there’s tons of energy these days around Enterprise 2.0 and Office 2.0. I don’t think I’ll make it to the Office 2.0 conference in person, but I’ll definitely check for a recording of your presentation. Maybe you can do a quick preview podcast of it… I’m going to be announcing more information about the podcast project this week, and I’ll be in touch with you about whether you might want to participate.

“Brilliant ideas can’t be stifled or silenced by old-school discrimation and old-boy networks.” Right on! Let’s get some brilliant ideas out there.

I could not agree with you and everyone commenting here more. In this hard-core niche tech sector, I rarely see a woman represented or hear a woman’s voice. We are living in the Age of Hilary and/or Ann Coulter (pick your poison). We are not shrinking violets. Speak up. Be heard. I took a snipe (and who-am-i to do such-a-thing?) recently at a well-respected blogger for a sexist post that I thought would ex-communicate me from the male-dominated church that is leading this crusade. He took it in stride.

As far as Office 2.0, a recurring theme in these comments is “fun.” There is an energy about Office 2.0 that attracted me to it. There is something really interesting going on relative to Enterprise 2.0 as an emerging idea. Let’s not let the gender bias issue distract us. They’re men; they make mistakes. Let’s go to Office 2.0 and learn something. It will be fun. And if we have something valuable to contribute, let’s publish it or podcast it or vlog it or…? That’s what this conference is all about. Brilliant ideas can’t be stifled or silenced by old-school discrimination and old-boy networks. Web 2.0 is an equal opportunity publisher.

In the meantime, I vote for a BlogHer dedicated exclusively to women in tech. Anyone in?

Admittedly, I simplified the tactics under use today and left out some very important ones. I agree with you that a multi-pronged approach is necessary. Yes, let’s get more networking happening. But speaker lists and introductions only go so far.

I think potential speakers need lots of opportunities for exposing their work and ideas to conference organizers. Lists of speakers are good. Friends of friends/associates of associates are good. Both would be improved with heightened visibility of the potential speakers along with lots of opportunity to practice and promote their speaking skills along the way. Imagine that you mention Person X as a speaker for someone’s conference. Maybe they’ve come across her work in a different context… perhaps at a podcast jam? It adds to the likelihood they’ll contact her. It also means they may have heard her express her ideas verbally instead of just in writing. Okay, podcasts aren’t in-person speaking engagements. Still, it’s something beyond a blog post.

You make good points about the disadvantages of tying this to a specific event. I think there are huge disadvantages to doing so, but also huge advantages. Here are my initial thoughts on your two points:

1. The idea that extending the conference’s reach to virtual participants takes away from the event itself. That may be so. There are many cases where the virtual version of something decreases the value of the in-person version. That may be because eventually the virtual version will drive out the in-person version, or at least many instances of it. There’s no doubt that we have a little bubble in 2.0 conferences (I don’t include BlogHer in that group). If people find their needs for networking, promoting themselves and their products, learning new things, etc. are better served with more virtual options and fewer in-person ones, that seems like a natural evolution.

However, I bet that extending the reach of some conferences virtually also has benefits. People might decide to come in person the next year after experiencing it online. It spreads the reach of the sponsors. It gives more attention to speakers. And so forth.

2. On the limitations of having it coincident in time and topic with an in-person tech conference. Limiting this initial experiment in scope and time has benefits–it’s easier to put together, we can get fast feedback, it makes it of interest to the actual conference attendees and sponsors and speakers so there is a specific population it’s targeted to.

It’s like the difference between baking a cake and opening a restaurant to me. I don’t want to open a restaurant but I can do the work to bake a cake, see how it tastes. It tastes good? Hmm, what more can I do with this idea, this recipe. It tastes really really bad, it fell, it looks horrible? Throw it out and move on.

I also find this Office 2.0 topic personally and professionally fascinating. I like the thought of being a part of it, but virtually. I want the conversation to be relevant, timely, controversial, fun. I think I can get more of that by doing it at the same time as the conference.

Anyway, thanks again for the thought-provoking comments. I don’t mind comments that look like posts; that usually means they’re really meaty.

Kathy: Excellent! Look forward to hearing more from you.

Scott: I’m totally up for an interview… provided we can edit out the retching sounds