Rapid technological change portends a drastically altered socioeconomic landscape as we move forward. With the practice of law being largely reactive, one cannot possibly pretend to provide legal advice without the ability to learn and relearn how business and personal interaction takes place.

I have wanted to write the same as that twit so many times…

I believe the difference between a good presenter and a bad presenter is the bad presenter is interested in how much they know, the good presenter is more concerned about how much you will know at the end of the session.

The truth is most of us have been blessed to be able to make enough money, even in a bad economy to maintain a reasonable standard of living. Money is not the issue, I am more concerned with the amount of time I have and how I invest it.

Time is a finite and personal resource I try to guard. As a lawyer and a minister I do my level best not to waste others’ time and expect the same, especially when I have paid for the privilege hearing your presentation…

The changes you forecast will reshuffle the cards and hopefully make opportunities for presenters who are knowledgeable, care about their listeners and want to add value to their lives and practices.

Presenters and conference organizers are going to have to develop thicker skins. Most presenters are used to the few people who come up after a presentation and say great things and ask for more.

Now the feedback is much more transparent and live. I think one of the #LTNY panels would have been very different if they had bothered monitoring Twitter.

On the plus side, sitting here in Boston, I was able to get snippets from the presentation. One of my questions on Twitter was asked by someone in the audience who relayed it back to me through Twitter.

One of the problems with CLE is that they are given by lawyers. Generally lawyers who have no presentation skills, poorly prepared for session and don’t try to engage with the audience. “I’ll take questions anytime” is not engaging the audience.

On the other side, I think you are looking far ahead. LTNY was a tech conference and there were only a handful of blog posts and a few dozen Twitterers transmitting. If a tech-focused conference has those few, a standard legal conference or CLE is likely to have fewer (none).

Positive comments about your conference are great (I love them), but negative comments are even better. Like you said, it’s feedback that can make the opportunity better, but it’s also an opportunity to engage with people. Conference organizers should have an online presence right there alongside the attendees. Real time. Good CLE providers have always known that CLE is a relationship business. We just have more tools to build those relationships now.

As far as competition goes (free or otherwise) I’m all for anything that raises the overall bar of CLE. CLE providers who are immobilized by changes might not make it, but look out for CLE providers who can couple a wealth of experience with innovation.

The live conference is not dead, and as it becomes more interactive (using the unconference style is one way) and as our ability to connect before, during, and after the event continues to improve, I believe it could become stronger than ever.

P.S. When I started blogging about conferences about a year ago, it was almost unthinkable that legal conferences would come this far this fast (I’m referring to LTNY). Needless to say, I am very excited about the developments. Thanks to all those at LTNY for pushing us into new territory so swiftly.