<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>mathewingram.com/work &#187; foo+camp</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mathewingram.com/work/tag/foocamp/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work</link>
	<description>... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jul 2011 15:34:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Does FOO Camp matter?</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/31/does-foo-camp-matter/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/31/does-foo-camp-matter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2006 15:50:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mathew</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foo+camp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oreilly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Winer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/31/does-foo-camp-matter/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It started as an inside joke among friends, but FOO Camp has turned into an &#8220;event&#8221; that seems to draw equal parts admiration and criticism, depending on whether you get invited to it or not. For those who don&#8217;t know, FOO is short for &#8220;friends of O&#8217;Reilly&#8221; &#8212; as in Tim O&#8217;Reilly of O&#8217;Reilly Media, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2006%2F08%2F31%2Fdoes-foo-camp-matter%2F"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2006%2F08%2F31%2Fdoes-foo-camp-matter%2F&amp;source=mathewi&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>It started as an inside joke among friends, but FOO Camp has turned into an &#8220;event&#8221; that seems to draw equal parts admiration and criticism, depending on whether you get invited to it or not. For those who don&#8217;t know, FOO is short for &#8220;friends of O&#8217;Reilly&#8221; &#8212; as in Tim O&#8217;Reilly of O&#8217;Reilly Media, publisher of technology books and organizer of conferences. According to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo_Camp">the Wikipedia entry</a> on FOO Camp, the event got started after an O&#8217;Reilly staffer joked about having a &#8220;FOO bar&#8221; at a conference &#8212; a reference to the time-honoured term &#8220;fubar,&#8221; mean &#8220;f***ed up beyond all recognition.&#8221;</p>
<p>Over the years, FOO Camp has grown to become one of the hot, invite-only happenings in the Valley &#8212; yes, even bigger than Mike Arrington&#8217;s TechCrunch parties. And along the way, there has been an undercurrent of frustration from those who feel left out by the invitation-only status of the event, including some people who have never been invited (but think they should be) and some who were invited once but then weren&#8217;t asked to come back. The <a href="http://www.scripting.com/2006/08/30.html#anOpenNoteToOreillyites">latest brouhaha</a> &#8212; not surprisingly &#8212; involves Web guru Dave Winer, who clearly falls into the former category.</p>
<p>This definitely has a high-school, &#8220;who&#8217;s in and who&#8217;s not&#8221; kind of feel to it, but it also raises the same kinds of issues that the old &#8220;A-list gatekeeper&#8221; debate over influence in the blogosphere does. Is O&#8217;Reilly being elitist by having an exclusive, invite-only party &#8212; and if so, does it matter? For those who see the Internet as leveling the playing field, lowering the barriers to entry, and so on, FOO Camp seems like a kick in the communal goolies. But Tim <a href="http://gigaom.com/2005/08/16/foocampfighting/#comment-8833">appears to see it</a> partly as good business and partly as an attempt to bring smart people together in a controlled setting, without having to worry about troublemakers, windbags and other assorted riff-raff (he <a href="http://www.cadenhead.org/workbench/news/3011/tim-oreilly-and-dave-winer-peer-peer">explained</a> to Roger Cadenhead why Dave isn&#8217;t invited, and there&#8217;s more details <a href="http://www.stoweboyd.com/message/2006/09/the_reason_dave.html">here</a>).</p>
<p>For my part, I think Tim should be able to hold whatever kind of event he wants (and <a href="http://www.stoweboyd.com/message/2006/08/foo_camp_i_dont.html">so does</a> my friend Stowe Boyd &#8212; who gets a comment from the Scobelizer). Would I like to be invited? Sure. But I&#8217;m not going to bitch and moan because I haven&#8217;t been. Call it elitism or exclusionary or arrogant if you like &#8212; the fact is that not everyone can be invited to everything, and sometimes being exclusive (or discriminating, in the positive sense of the word) makes for a better event. My friend Kent Newsome has <a href="http://www.newsome.org/2006/08/thinking-more-about-foo-camp.shtml">some thoughts</a> from the other side of the argument, and Tom Coates of plasticbag has <a href="http://www.plasticbag.org/archives/2006/09/some_thoughts_about_f/">his own</a> thoughts (he attended this year).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/31/does-foo-camp-matter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

